Configuring business process models

Abstract

A configurable business process model (sometimes referred to as a reference business process model) may be configured to meet the specific requirements of an organization. The configuration activity is required to automatically determine the variability of a configurable process model and ensure the correctness of a specific process model. However, few approaches solve the problem. In this paper, we propose an innovative approach for automatically separating a configurable process model into atomic and correct sub-process models (sub-process models without abnormal behavioral problems). The atomic sub-process models that fulfill specific requirements are merged into specific process models that are provided for organizations. Compared with existing approaches, since the configuration activity is incorporated into the verification process of a process model at design time and can obtain all feasible configurations, our approach avoids independently handling the configuration activity and does not suffer from computational complexity. Moreover, our approach is language-independent. We have developed a prototype tool for configuring these process models.

References

1. W.M.P. van der Aalst, et al. Correctness-Preserving Configuration of Business Process Models. FASE 2008:46--61
2. W.M.P. van der Aalst, et al. Preserving Correctness During Business Process Model Configuration, Formal Asp. Comput. (FAC) 22(3-4):459--482 (2010)
3. W.M.P. van der Aalst, et al. Correctness Ensuring Process Configuration: An Approach Based on Partner Synthesis. BPM 2010:95--111
4. Wil M. P. van der Aalst: Business Process Configuration in the Cloud: How to Support and Analyze Multi-tenant Processes? ECOWS 2011: 3--10
5. Wil M. P. van der Aalst, et al. Ensuring correctness during process configuration via partner synthesis. Information System, 37(6):574--592 (2012)
6. W.M.P. van der Aalst, et al. Preserving Correctness During Business Process Model Configuration, Formal Aspects of Computing 22 (3) (2010) 459--482.
7. J. Becker, et al. Adaptive Reference Modeling: Integrating Configurative and Generic Adaptation Techniques for Information Models, 2007, pp.27--58.
8. F. Gottschalk, et al. Configurable Workflow Models. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. (IJCIS) 17(2):177--221 (2008)
9. A. Hallerbach, T. Bauer, M. Reichert, Guaranteeing Soundness of Configurable Process Variants in Provop, in: CEC, IEEE, 2009, pp. 98--105.
10. A. Hallerbach, T. Bauer, M. Reichert, Capturing Variability in Business Process Models: The Provop Approach, Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice 22 (6-7) (2010) 519--546.
11. Haugen, K. E. Husa, R.K. Runde, K. Stlen. STAIRS towards formal design with sequence diagrams. Software and Systems Modeling, 4(4):355--367, 2005
12. J. Jiang, et al. Modeling and analyzing mixed communications in service-oriented trustworthy software. Science China Information Science, 55(12): 2738--2756, 2012
13. J. Jiang, S. Zhang, P. Gong, et al. Message dependency-based adaptation of services. APSCC 2011:442--449
14. J. Schroeter, P. Mucha, M. Muth, K. Jugel, and M. Lochau. Dynamic Configuration Management of Cloud-based Applications. SPLC 2012:171--178
15. M. La Rosa, M. Dumas, A. ter Hofstede, J. Mendling, Configurable Multi-Perspective Business Process Models, Information Systems, 36(2):313--340, 2011
16. C. Li, M. Reichert, and A. Wombacher, Discovering Reference Models by Mining Process Variants Using a Heuristic Approach. BPM 2009:344--362.
17. C. Li, M. Reichert, A. Wombacher, The Minadept Clustering Approach for Discovering Reference Process Models Out of Process Variants, International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 19 (3) (2010) 159--203.
18. N. Lohmann and D. Weinberg. Wendy: A tool to synthesize partners for services. In PETRI NETS 2010, LNCS. Springer, 2010.
19. R. Mietzner, et al. Variability modeling to support customization and deployment of multi-tenant-aware software as a service applications. PESOS '09, p.18--25, 2009
20. I. Reinhartz-Berger, et al. Organizational Reference Models: Supporting an Adequate Design of Local Business Processes, IJBPIM, 4(2) (2009) 134--149
21. I. Reinhartz-Berger, et al. Extending the Adaptability of Reference Models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (Part A), 40(5) (2011) 1045--1056.
22. M. Rosemann, W.M.P. van der Aalst. A Configurable Reference Modeling Language, Information Systems 32 (1) (2007) 1--23.
23. S. T. Ruehl and U. Andelfinger. Applying software product lines to create customizable software-as-a-service applications. SPLC Workshops 2011:1--16
24. J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson and G. Booch. The unified modeling language Reference Manual. Addisson-Wesley, 2004
25. M. Nielsen and G. Winskel. Models For Concurrency. In: Handbook of Logic and the Foundations of Computer Science, vol. 4, 1--148, Oxford University Press (1995).
26. K. Wolf. Does my service have partners? T. Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency 2: 152--171 (2009)

Index Terms

• General and reference

  • Cross-computing tools and techniques

    • Verification

• Software and its engineering

  • Software creation and management

    • Designing software

      • Software implementation planning

        • Software design techniques

    • Software development process management

    • Software verification and validation

      • Formal software verification

  • Software organization and properties

    • Software functional properties

      • Formal methods

        • Software verification

• Theory of computation

  • Semantics and reasoning

    • Program reasoning

      • Program verification