Advertisement

Soundness and Separability of Workflow Nets in the Stepwise Refinement Approach

  • Kees van Hee
  • Natalia Sidorova
  • Marc Voorhoeve
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2679)

Abstract

Workflow nets are recognized as a modelling paradigm for the business process modelling. We introduce and investigate several correctness notions for workflow nets, ranging from proper termination of cases to their mutual independence. We define refinement operators for nets and investigate preservation of correctness through these operators. This gives rise to a class of nets that are provably correct.

Keywords

Petri nets workflow modelling verification correctness soundness separability serialisability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    W.M.P. van der Aalst. Verification of Workflow Nets. In Azéma, P. and Balbo, G., editors, Proceedings ATPN’ 97, LNCS 1248, Springer 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    W.M.P. van der Aalst, J. Desel and A. Oberweis, editors Business Process Management, Models, Techniques and Empirical Studies. LNCS 1806, Springer 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    W.M.P. van der Aalst and K.M. van Hee. Workflow Management: models, methods and systems. The MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W.M.P. van der Aalst. Workflow Verification: Finding Control-Flow Errors using Petri-net-based techniques. In J. Desel and A. Oberweis, editors Business Process Management, Models, Techniques and Empirical Studies. LNCS 1806, Springer 1998 [2], pages 161–183.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Ceri and G. Pelagatti. Distributed Databases: Principles and Systems. McGraw-Hill 1984.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximaton of fixpoints. In Fourth Annual Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL) (Los Angeles, Ca), pages 238–252. ACM, January 1977.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Dehnert and P. Rittgen. Relaxed Soundness of Business Processes. In K.R. Dittrich, A. Geppert and M.C. Norrie, editors, Proceedings CAISE’ 01, LNCS 2068, pages 157–170, Springer 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Desel and J. Esparza. Free Choice Petri Nets. Cambridge University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R.J. van Glabbeek and R.P. Weijland. Branching Time and Abstraction in Bisimulation Semantics (extended abstract). In G.X. Ritter, editor, Proceedings IFIP’ 89, pages 613–618. North Holland 1989.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Kindler, A. Martens and W. Reisig. Inter-operability of Workflow Applications: Local Criteria for Global Soundness. In J. Desel and A. Oberweis, editors Business Process Management, Models, Techniques and Empirical Studies. LNCS 1806, Springer 1998 [2], pages 235–253.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Milner. Operational and algebraic semantics of concurrent processes. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B, chapter 19, pages 1201–1242. Elsevier Science, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H.M.W. Verbeek, T. Basten, and W.M.P. van der Aalst. Diagnosing workflow processes using Woflan. The Computer Journal, 44(4):246–279, 2001.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kees van Hee
    • 1
  • Natalia Sidorova
    • 1
  • Marc Voorhoeve
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations