Abstract
Declarative process modelling languages like Declare focus on describing a process by restrictions over the behaviour, which must be satisified throughout process execution. Although this paradigm allows more flexibility, it has been shown that such models are often hard to read and understand, which affects their modelling, execution and maintenance in a negative way. A larger degree of flexibility leads to a multitude of different process models that describe the same process. Often it is difficult for the modeller to keep the model as simple as possible without over- or underspecification. Hence, model checking, especially comparing declarative process models on equality becomes an important task. In this paper, we determine and prove a theoretical upper bound for the trace length up to which the process executions of Declare models must be compared, to decide with certainty whether two process models are equal or not.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
References
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining - Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Wiesbaden (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19345-3
Abbad Andaloussi, A., Burattin, A., Slaats, T., Petersen, A.C.M., Hildebrandt, T.T., Weber, B.: Exploring the understandability of a hybrid process design artifact based on DCR graphs. In: Reinhartz-Berger, I., Zdravkovic, J., Gulden, J., Schmidt, R. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2019. LNBIP, vol. 352, pp. 69–84. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20618-5_5
Ackermann, L., Schönig, S., Petter, S., Schützenmeier, N., Jablonski, S.: Execution of multi-perspective declarative process models. In: OTM 2018 Conferences (2018)
Abbad Andaloussi, A., Buch-Lorentsen, J., López, H.A., Slaats, T., Weber, B.: Exploring the modeling of declarative processes using a hybrid approach. In: Laender, A.H.F., Pernici, B., Lim, E.-P., de Oliveira, J.P.M. (eds.) ER 2019. LNCS, vol. 11788, pp. 162–170. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33223-5_14
Burattin, A., Maggi, F.M., Sperduti, A.: Conformance checking based on multi-perspective declarative process models. Expert Syst. Appl. 65, 194–211 (2016)
Ciccio, C.D., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Mendling, J.: Resolving inconsistencies and redundancies in declarative process models. Inf. Syst. 64, 425–446 (2017)
Cook, S.A.: The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. In: Proceedings of the Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. STOC 1971, ACM, NY, USA (1971)
De Smedt, J., De Weerdt, J., Serral, E., Vanthienen, J.: Improving understandability of declarative process models by revealing hidden dependencies. In: Nurcan, S., Soffer, P., Bajec, M., Eder, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9694, pp. 83–98. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39696-5_6
Fahland, D., et al.: Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of understandability. In: Halpin, T. (ed.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2009. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 353–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01862-6_29
Fahland, D., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Weber, B., Weidlich, M., Zugal, S.: Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of maintainability. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Sadiq, S., Leymann, F. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNBIP, vol. 43, pp. 477–488. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12186-9_45
Gastin, P., Oddoux, D.: Fast LTL to Büchi automata translation. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 53–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44585-4_6
Haisjackl, C., et al.: Understanding declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results. Softw. Syst. Model. 15(2), 325–352 (2016)
Hildebrandt, T.T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T., Zanitti, F.: Contracts for cross-organizational workflows as timed dynamic condition response graphs. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 82(5–7), 164–185 (2013)
Hopcroft, J., Motwani, R., Ullman, J.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Pearson/Addison Wesley, Boston (2007)
Hopcroft, J.E.: An n log n algorithm for minimizing states in a finite automaton. Technical report, Stanford, CA, USA (1971)
Käppel, M., Ackermann, L., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Language-independent look-ahead for checking multi-perspective declarative process models. Softw. Syst. Model. 20(5), 1379–1401 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-020-00857-8
Laroussinie, F., Markey, N., Schnoebelen, P.: Temporal logic with forgettable past. In: Proceedings of the 17th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (2002)
Pesic, M.: Constraint-based workflow management systems : shifting control to users. Ph.D. thesis, Industrial Engineering and Innovation Sciences (2008)
Schönig, S., Ackermann, L., Jablonski, S.: Towards an implementation of data and resource patterns in constraint-based process models. In: Modelsward (2018)
Schützenmeier, N., Käppel, M., Petter, S., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Detection of declarative process constraints in LTL formulas. In: Pergl, R., Babkin, E., Lock, R., Malyzhenkov, P., Merunka, V. (eds.) EOMAS 2019. LNBIP, vol. 366, pp. 131–145. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35646-0_10
Shi, Y., Xiao, S., Li, J., Guo, J., Pu, G.: Sat-based automata construction for LTL over finite traces. In: 2020 27th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC) (2020)
Skydanienko, V., Francescomarino, C.D., Maggi, F.: A tool for generating event logs from multi-perspective declare models. In: BPM (Demos) (2018)
Smedt, J.D., Weerdt, J.D., Serral, E., Vanthienen, J.: Discovering hidden dependencies in constraint-based declarative process models for improving understandability. Inf. Syst. 74(Part), 40–52 (2018)
Westergaard, M., Stahl, C., Reijers, H.: Unconstrainedminer: efficient discovery of generalized declarative process models. BPMcenter. org, BPM reports (2013)
Zeising, M., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Towards a common platform for the support of routine and agile business processes. In: Collaborative Computing: Networking, Applications and Worksharing (2014)
Zuck, L.: Past temporal logic. Ph.D. thesis, Weizmann Institute, Israel (1986)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Schützenmeier, N., Käppel, M., Petter, S., Jablonski, S. (2021). Upper-Bounded Model Checking for Declarative Process Models. In: Serral, E., Stirna, J., Ralyté, J., Grabis, J. (eds) The Practice of Enterprise Modeling. PoEM 2021. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 432. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91279-6_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91279-6_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-91278-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-91279-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)
