Towards a Formal Approach for Verifying Dynamic Workflows in the Cloud

  • Fairouz FakhfakhEmail author
  • Hatem Hadj Kacem
  • Ahmed Hadj Kacem
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 341)


Dynamic workflow applications are increasingly used in many enterprises to satisfy the variable enterprise requirements. Cloud computing has gained a particular attention to run these applications. However, due to lack of formal description of the resource perspective, the behavior of Cloud resource allocation cannot be correctly managed. This paper fills this gap by proposing a formal model which verifies the correctness of dynamic workflow changes in a Cloud environment using the Event-B method. Our model considers properties related to control flow, data flow and resource perspectives. It aims to preserve the correctness of workflow properties at both design time and runtime.


Dynamic workflow Cloud resources Formal model Data flow 


  1. 1.
    Sadiq, S.W., Orlowska, M.E., Sadiq, W.: Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Inf. Syst. 30(5), 349–378 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Semantic correctness in adaptive process management systems. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 193–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kumar, A., Yao, W., Chu, C.-H., Li, Z.: Ensuring compliance with semantic constraints in process adaptation with rule-based event processing. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2010. LNCS, vol. 6403, pp. 50–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asadi, M., Mohabbati, B., Grner, G., Gasevic, D.: Development and validation of customized process models. Syst. Softw. 96, 73–92 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barron, M.A.Z., Ruiz-Vanoye, J.A., Díaz-Parra, O., Fuentes-Penna, A., Loranca, M.B.B.: A mathematical model for optimizing resources of scientific projects. Computación y Sistemas 20(4) (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kumar, A., Yao, W., Chu, C.H.: Flexible process compliance with semantic constraints using mixed-integer programming. INFORMS J. Comput. 25(3), 543–559 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ahmed, E., Naveed, A., Hamid, S.H.A., Gani, A., Salah, K.: Formal analysis of seamless application execution in mobile cloud computing. Supercomputing 73(10), 4466–4492 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boubaker, S., Mammar, A., Graiet, M., Gaaloul, W.: Formal verification of cloud resource allocation in business processes using Event-B. In: Advanced Information Networking and Applications, pp. 746–753. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abrial, J.R.: Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rezaee, A., Rahmani, A.M., Movaghar, A., Teshnehlab, M.: Formal process algebraic modeling, verification, and analysis of an abstract fuzzy inference cloud service. Supercomputing 67(2), 345–383 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Van Dongen, B., Mendling, J., Van Der Aalst, W.: Structural patterns for soundness of business process models. In: Enterprise Distributed Object Computing, pp. 116–128. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Change patterns and change support features-enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 66(3), 438–466 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fakhfakh, F., Kacem, H.H., Kacem, A.H., Fakhfakh, F.: Preserving the correctness of dynamic workflows within a cloud environment. In: Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems (2018)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hollingsworth, D., Hampshire, U.: Workflow management coalition: the workflow reference model. Document Number TC00-1003 19 (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Song, W., Ma, X., Cheung, S.C., Hu, H., Lü, J.: Preserving data flow correctness in process adaptation. In: Services Computing, pp. 9–16. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lamport, L.: The temporal logic of actions. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 16(3), 872–923 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Boubaker, S., Mammar, A., Graiet, M., Gaaloul, W.: An Event-B based approach for ensuring correct configurable business processes. In: Web Services, pp. 460–467 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Integration and verification of semantic constraints in adaptive process management systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 64(1), 3–23 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Guaranteeing soundness of configurable process variants in provop. In: Commerce and Enterprise Computing, pp. 98–105. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    van der Aalst, W.M., Dumas, M., Gottschalk, F., Ter Hofstede, A.H., Rosa, M.L., Mendling, J.: Preserving correctness during business process model configuration. Formal Aspects Comput. 22(3), 459–482 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fairouz Fakhfakh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hatem Hadj Kacem
    • 1
  • Ahmed Hadj Kacem
    • 1
  1. 1.ReDCAD LaboratoryUniversity of SfaxSfaxTunisia

Personalised recommendations