Information Systems Modeling: Language, Verification, and Tool Support
- 2 Citations
- 1.8k Downloads
Abstract
Information and processes are both important aspects of information systems. Nevertheless, most existing languages for modeling information systems focus either on one or the other. Languages that focus on information modeling often neglect the fact that information is manipulated by processes, while languages that focus on processes abstract from the structure of the information. In this paper, we present an approach for modeling and verification of information systems that combines information models and process models using an automated theorem prover. In our approach, set theory and first-order logic are used to express the structure and constraints of information, while Petri nets of a special kind, called Petri nets with identifiers, are used to capture the dynamic aspects of the systems. The proposed approach exhibits a unique balance between expressiveness and formal foundation, as it allows capturing a wide range of information systems, including infinite state systems, while allowing for automated verification, as it ensures the decidability of the reachability problem. The approach was implemented in a publicly available modeling and simulation tool and used in teaching of Information Systems students.
Keywords
IS modeling Verification of IS models Tools for IS modelingNotes
Acknowledgment
Artem Polyvyanyy was partly supported by the Australian Research Council Discovery Project DP180102839.
References
- 1.van der Aalst, W.M.P., Stahl, C.: Modeling Business Processes—A Petri Net-Oriented Approach. Cooperative Information Systems Series. MIT Press, Cambridge (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Abiteboul, S., Segoufin, L., Vianu, V.: Modeling and verifying active XML artifacts. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 10–15 (2009)Google Scholar
- 3.Abiteboul, S., Vianu, V., Fordham, B.S., Yesha, Y.: Relational transducers for electronic commerce. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 61(2), 236–269 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Belardinelli, F., Lomuscio, A., Patrizi, F.: Verification of agent-based artifact systems. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 51, 333–376 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Bhattacharya, K., Gerede, C., Hull, R., Liu, R., Su, J.: Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 288–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Montali, M.: Foundations of data-aware process analysis: a database theory perspective. In: PODS, pp. 1–12. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
- 7.Calvanese, D., Montali, M., Estañol, M., Teniente, E.: Verifiable UML artifact-centric business process models. In: CIKM. ACM Press (2014)Google Scholar
- 8.De Giacomo, G., Oriol, X., Estañol, M., Teniente, E.: Linking data and BPMN processes to achieve executable models. In: Dubois, E., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10253, pp. 612–628. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59536-8_38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.De Masellis, R., Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Montali, M., Tessaris, S.: Add data into business process verification: bridging the gap between theory and practice. In: AAAI, pp. 1091–1099. AAAI Press (2017)Google Scholar
- 10.Deutsch, A., Hull, R., Li, Y., Vianu, V.: Automatic verification of database-centric systems. SIGLOG News 5(2), 37–56 (2018)Google Scholar
- 11.Deutsch, A., Li, Y., Vianu, V.: Verification of hierarchical artifact systems. In: PODS, pp. 179–194. ACM Press (2016)Google Scholar
- 12.Esparza, J., Nielsen, M.: Decidability issues for Petri nets–a survey. EATCS Bulletin, vol. 52 (1994)Google Scholar
- 13.Estañol, M., Sancho, M.-R., Teniente, E.: Verification and validation of UML artifact-centric business process models. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 434–449. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19069-3_27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Gerede, C.E., Su, J.: Specification and verification of artifact behaviors in business process models. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 181–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74974-5_15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Halpin, T.A., Bloesch, A.C.: Data modeling in UML and ORM: a comparison. J. Database Manag. 10(4), 4–13 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Hariri, B., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Deutsch, A., Montali, M.: Verification of relational data-centric dynamic systems with external services. In: PODS. ACM Press (2013)Google Scholar
- 17.van Hee, K.M., Sidorova, N., Voorhoeve, M., van der Werf, J.M.E.M.: Generation of database transactions with Petri nets. Fundam. Inform. 93(1–3), 171–184 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 18.Hull, R., Su, J., Vaculín, R.: Data management perspectives on business process management: tutorial overview. In: SIGMOD, pp. 943–948. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
- 19.Jensen, K.: Coloured Petri Nets-Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use. Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series, vol. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03241-1CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 20.Lasota, S.: Decidability border for Petri nets with data: WQO dichotomy conjecture. In: Kordon, F., Moldt, D. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9698, pp. 20–36. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39086-4_3CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 21.Lazic, R., Newcomb, T.C., Ouaknine, J., Roscoe, A.W., Worrell, J.: Nets with tokens which carry data. Fundam. Inform. 88(3), 251–274 (2008)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- 22.Lipton, R.J.: The reachability problem requires exponential space. Research report, Department of Computer Science, Yale University (1976)Google Scholar
- 23.Mayr, E.W.: Persistence of vector replacement systems is decidable. Acta Inf. 15(3), 309–318 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Montali, M., Rivkin, A.: DB-Nets: on the marriage of colored Petri nets and relational databases. In: Koutny, M., Kleijn, J., Penczek, W. (eds.) Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency XII. LNCS, vol. 10470, pp. 91–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55862-1_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: Data-driven modeling and coordination of large process structures. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 131–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76848-7_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts: an approach to operational specification. IBM Syst. J. 42(3), 428–445 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Reijers, H.A., et al.: Evaluating data-centric process approaches: does the human factor factor in? SoSyM 16(3), 649–662 (2017)Google Scholar
- 28.Rosa-Velardo, F., de Frutos-Escrig, D.: Decidability and complexity of Petri nets with unordered data. Theor. Comput. Sci. 412, 4439–4451 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Sassone, V., Nielsen, M., Winskel, G.: Models for concurrency: towards a classification. Theor. Comput. Sci. 170(1–2), 297–348 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Spielmann, M.: Verification of relational transducers for electronic commerce. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 66(1), 40–65 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Sun, S.X., Zhao, J.L., Nunamaker Jr., J.F., Sheng, O.R.L.: Formulating the data-flow perspective for business process management. Inf. Syst. Res. 17(4), 374–391 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Sutcliffe, G., Schulz, S., Claessen, K., Van Gelder, A.: Using the TPTP language for writing derivations and finite interpretations. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) IJCAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4130, pp. 67–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11814771_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.van der Werf, J.M.E.M., Polyvyanyy, A.: An assignment on information system modeling. In: Daniel, F., Sheng, Q.Z., Motahari, H. (eds.) BPM 2018. LNBIP, vol. 342, pp. 553–566. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11641-5_44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.van der Werf, J.M.E.M., Polyvyanyy, A.: On the decidability of reachability problems for models of information systems. Technical report UU-CS-2018-005, Utrecht University (2018)Google Scholar
- 35.Westergaard, M., Kristensen, L.M.: The Access/CPN framework: a tool for interacting with the CPN-tools simulator. In: Franceschinis, G., Wolf, K. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5606, pp. 313–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02424-5_19CrossRefGoogle Scholar