On the Semantics of EPCs: Efficient Calculation and Simulation

Extended Abstract
  • Nicolas Cuntz
  • Ekkart Kindler
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3649)


Recently, we have defined a formal semantics of Event driven Process Chains (EPCs) that, for the first time, faithfully captures the non-local behaviour of the XOR- and OR-join connectors. This fixed-point characterisation of the semantics of EPCs, however, does not provide an efficient algorithm for calculating the semantics of an EPC and for simulating it.

In this paper, we will show how to calculate this semantics of an EPC in an efficient way by employing Kleene’s fixed-point theorem and different techniques from symbolic model checking. These algorithms have been implemented in an open source tool for simulating and analysing EPCs: EPC Tools.


Business Process Model Check Transition Relation Formal Semantic Process Folder 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Keller, G., Nüttgens, M., Scheer, A.W.: Semantische Prozessmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Prozessketten (EPK). Technical Report Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik (IWi), Heft 89, Universit ät des Saarlandes (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Langner, P., Schneider, C., Wehler, J.: Petri Net Based Certification of Event driven Process Chains. In: Desel, J., Silva, M. (eds.) ICATPN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1420, pp. 286–305. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rittgen, P.: Quo vadis EPK in ARIS? Wirtschaftsinformatik 42, 27–35 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van der Aalst, W., Desel, J., Kindler, E.: On the semantics of EPCs: A vicious circle. In: Nüttgens, M., Rump, F.J. (eds.) EPK 2002. Geschäftsprozessmanagement mit Ereignisgesteuerten Prozessketten, pp. 71–79 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kindler, E.: On the semantics of EPCs: Resolving the vicious circle. In: Desel, J., Pernici, B., Weske, M. (eds.) BPM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3080, pp. 82–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burch, J., Clarke, E., McMillan, K., Dill, D., Hwang, L.: Symbolic model checking: 1020 states and beyond. Information and Computation 98, 142–170 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cuntz, N.:Über die effiziente Simulation von Ereignisgesteuerten Prozessketten. Master’s thesis, University of Paderborn, Department of Computer Science (2004) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cuntz, N., Kindler, E.: On the semantics of EPCs: Efficient calculation and simulation. In: Nüttgens, M., Rump, F.J. (eds.) EPK 2004. Gesch∙aftsprozessmanagement mit Ereignisgesteuerten Prozessketten, pp. 7–26 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nüttgens, M., Rump, F.J.: Syntax und Semantik Ereignisgesteuerter Prozessketten (EPK). In: PROMISE 2002, Prozessorientierte Methoden und Werkzeuge f∙ur die Entwicklung von Informationssystemen. GI Lecture Notes in Informatics, Gesellschaft für Informatik, vol. P- 21, pp. 64–77 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kindler, E.: The Model Checking in Education (MCiE) project: Home page (2004),
  11. 11.
    Cuntz, N., Kindler, E.: The EPC Tools project: Home page (2004),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Cuntz
    • 1
  • Ekkart Kindler
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Graphics and Multimedia Systems GroupUniversity of Siegen 
  2. 2.Software Engineering GroupUniversity of Paderborn 

Personalised recommendations