Soundness of data-aware, case-centric processes

  • Marco MontaliEmail author
  • Diego Calvanese
PV 2014


In recent years, a plethora of foundational results and corresponding techniques and tools has been developed to support the modeling, analysis, execution and improvement of business processes along their entire lifecycle. A major shortcoming of the analysis techniques is that they solely focus on the control-flow dimension of the process, omitting how business objects (i.e., cases) and their data affect and are manipulated by process instances and their tasks. In this work, we aim at filling this gap. We recast the classical notion of case-centric business process in a data-aware context. An emitter action is used to generate new cases, and while a case flows through the process control-flow, corresponding data are created, updated, and deleted by operating over a full-fledged relational database with constraints. To make our investigation concrete, we ground it on the recently introduced framework of data-centric dynamic systems (DCDSs). We reformulate the standard correctness criterion of soundness into this rich setting, and show that it is in general undecidable to check. We then provide a fine-grained analysis on the role of data in business processes. We substantiate this analysis by introducing a class of case-centric DCDSs that enjoys good modeling principles, and at the same time guarantees decidability of soundness. Decidability is obtained by finding a cutoff on the number of process instances that must be subject to the soundness test. We finally show that the introduced modeling guidelines are strict, in the sense that weakening even one single requirement they pose leads to undecidability.



The authors are partially supported by the EU project Optique (FP7-IP-318338), and by the UNIBZ internal projects KENDO and OnProm.


  1. 1.
    Abdulla, P.A., Atig, M.F., Kara, A., Rezine, O.: Verification of dynamic register automata. In: Proc. of the 44th Int. Conf. on foundation of software technology and theoretical computer science (FSTTCS), volume 29 of LIPIcs, pp. 653–665. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Deutsch, A., Montali, M.: Verification of relational data-centric dynamic systems with external services. In: 32nd ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Symp. on principles of database systems (PODS) (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., Calvanese, D., Deutsch, A., Montali, M.: State-boundedness for decidability of verification in data-aware dynamic systems. In: 14th Int. Conf. on the principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR). AAAI Press (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., Calvanese, D., Montali, M., De Giacomo, G., De Masellis, R., Felli, P.: Description logic knowledge and action bases. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 46, 651–686 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baier, C., Katoen, J.-P., Guldstrand, Larsen K.: Principles of model checking. The MIT Press, USA (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Belardinelli, F., Lomuscio, A., Patrizi, F.: An abstraction technique for the verification of artifact-centric systems. In: 13th Int. Conf. on the principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR) (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bojanczyk, M., Braud, L., Klin, B., Lasota, S.: Towards nominal computation. In: 39th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symp. on principles of programming languages (POPL). ACM Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bojanczyk, M., Segoufin, L., Torunczyk, S.: Verification of database-driven systems via amalgamation. In: 32nd ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Symp. on principles of database systems (PODS) (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Montali, M.: Foundations of data-aware process analysis: a database theory perspective. In: 32nd ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Symp. on principles of database systems (PODS). ACM Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Montali, M., Patrizi, F.: Verification and synthesis in description logic based dynamic systems. In: 7th Int. Conf. on web reasoning and rule systems (RR), volume 7994 of LNCS. Springer, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Calvanese, D., Montali, M., Montserrat, E., Teniente, E.: Verifiable UML artifact-centric business process models. In: 23rd ACM Int. Conf. on information and knowledge management (CIKM) (2014) (To appear)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chandra, A., Harel, D.: Computable queries for relational database systems. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 21, 156–178 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dumas, M.: On the convergence of data and process engineering. In: 15th Int. Conf. on advances in databases and information systems (ADBIS), volume 6909 of LNCS, pp. 19–26. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fahland, D., de Leoni, M., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Behavioral conformance of artifact-centric process models. In: 14th Int. Conf. on business information systems (BIS), volume 87 of LNCS. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fahland, D., Favre, C., Koehler, J., Lohmann, N., Völzer, H., Wolf, K.: Analysis on demand: instantaneous soundness checking of industrial business process models. Data Knowl. Eng. 70(5), 448–466 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gabbay, M., Pitts, A.M.: A new approach to abstract syntax with variable binding. Formal Asp. Comput. 13(3–5), 2002 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hüchting, R., Majumdar, R., Meyer, R.: A theory of name boundedness. In: Proc. of the 24th Int. Conf. on concurrency theory (CONCUR), volume 8052 of LNCS, pp. 182–196. Springer, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hull, R.: Artifact-centric business process models: Brief survey of research results and challenges. In: On the move confederated Int. Conf. (OTM), volume 5332 of LNCS. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hull, R., Benedikt, M., Christophides, V., Su, J.: E-services: a look behind the curtain. In: 22nd ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Symp. on principles of database systems (PODS), pp. 1–14 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lomuscio, A., Michaliszyn, J.: Model checking unbounded artifact-centric systems. In: 14th Int. Conf. on the principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR). AAAI Press, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Meyer, R.: On boundedness in depth in the pi-calculus. In: Proc. of the 5th IFIP Int. Conf. On theoretical computer science (TCS), volume 273 of IFIP, pp. 477–489. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Minsky, M.L.: Computation: finite and infinite machines. Prentice-Hall Inc, USA (1967)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Montali, M., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G.: Verification of data-aware commitment-based multiagent system. In: 13th Int. Conf. on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS), pp. 157–164. IFAAMAS (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Montanari, U., Pistore, M.: History-dependent automata: An introduction. In: 5th Int. school on formal methods for the design of computer, communication, and software systems (SFM-Moby), volume 3465 of LNCS. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Needham, R.: Distributed systems, chapter names. Addison Wesley Publ. Co, USA (1989)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rosa-Velardo, F., de Frutos-Escrig, D.: Decidability and complexity of petri nets with unordered data. Theor. Comput. Sci. 412(34), 4439–4451 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Solomakhin, D., Montali, M., Tessaris, S., De Masellis, R.: Verification of artifact-centric systems: decidability and modeling issues. In: Proc. of the 11th Int. Conf. on service oriented computing (ICSOC) (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of workflow nets. In: 18th Int. Conf. on application and theory of petri nets (ICATPN), volume 1248 of LNCS, pp. 407–426. Springer, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Sidorova, N., Verbeek, H.M.W., Voorhoeve, M., Wynn, M.T.: Soundness of workflow nets: classification, decidability, and analysis. Formal Asp. Comput. 23(3) (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vianu, V.: Automatic verification of database-driven systems: a new frontier. In: 12th Int. Conf. on database theory (ICDT) (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weske, M.: Business process management: concepts, languages, architectures. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.KRDB Research Centre for Knowledge and DataFree University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations