Semantic Monitoring and Compensation in Socio-technical Processes

  • Yingzhi Gou
  • Aditya Ghose
  • Chee-Fon Chang
  • Hoa Khanh Dam
  • Andrew Miller
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8823)


Socio-technical processes are becoming increasingly important, with the growing recognition of the computational limits of full automation, the growth in popularity of crowd sourcing, the complexity and openness of modern organizations etc. A key challenge in managing socio-technical processes is dealing with the flexible, and sometimes dynamic, nature of the execution of human-mediated tasks. It is well-recognized that human execution does not always conform to predetermined coordination models, and is often error-prone. This paper addresses the problem of semantically monitoring the execution of socio-technical processes to check for non-conformance, and the problem of recovering from (or compensating for) non-conformance. This paper proposes a semantic solution to the problem, by leveraging semantically annotated process models to detect non-conformance, and using the same semantic annotations to identify compensatory human-mediated tasks.


Business Process Compensation Point Business Process Management Normative Trace Semantic Annotation 
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.
    Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.: Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Information Systems 33(1), 64–95 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fensel, D., Facca, F., Simperl, E.: Web Service Modeling Ontology. In: Semantic Web Services, pp. 107–129. Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fensel, D., Lausen, H., Polleres, A., Bruijn, J., Stollberg, M., Roman, D., Domingue, J.: Enabling Semantic Web Services: The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hepp, M., Leymann, F., Domingue, J., Wahler, A., Fensel, D.: Semantic business process management: A vision towards using semantic Web services for business process management. In: IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering, pp. 535–540. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hinge, K., Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Process SEER: A tool for semantic effect annotation of business process models. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International EDOC Conference. IEEE Computer Society Process (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Pietro, I., Pagliarecci, F., Spalazzi, L.: Model checking semantically annotated services. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 38, 592–608 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith, F., Proietti, M.: Rule-Based Behavioral Reasoning on Semantic Business Processes. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence, pp. 130–143. SciTePress (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weber, I., Hoffmann, J., Mendling, J.: Beyond soundness: On the verification of semantic business process models. Distributed and Parallel Databases 27, 271–343 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Rospocher, M., Serafini, L., Tonella, P.: Semantcally-aided business process modeling. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 114–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Auditing Business Process Compliance. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Martin, D., et al.: Bringing semantics to web services: The OWL-S approach. In: Cardoso, J., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) SWSWPC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3387, pp. 26–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meyer, H.: On the Semantics of Service Compositions. In: Marchiori, M., Pan, J.Z., de Sainte Marie, C. (eds.) RR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4524, pp. 31–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Montali, M., Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Storari, S.: Declarative specification and verification of service choreographiess. ACM Transactions on the Web 4, 3:1–3:62 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith, F., Missikoff, M., Proietti, M.: Ontology-Based Querying of Composite Services. In: Ardagna, C.A., Damiani, E., Maciaszek, L.A., Missikoff, M., Parkin, M. (eds.) BSME 2010. LNCS, vol. 7350, pp. 159–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ginsberg, M.L., Smith, D.E.: Reasoning about action I: A Possible World Approach. Artificial Intelligence 35(2), 165–195 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cook, J.E., Wolf, A.L.: Software process validation: quantitatively measuring the correspondence of a process to a model. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 8(2), 147–176 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Actor eco-systems: From high-level agent models to executable processes via semantic annotations. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference, vol. 02, pp. 177–184. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Koliadis, G., Vranesevic, A., Bhuiyan, M., Krishna, A., Ghose, A.K.: A combined approach for supporting the business process model lifecycle. In: Proceedings of the, Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1305–1319 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klein, M., Dellarocas, C.: A knowledge-based approach to handling exceptions in workflow systems. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 9, 399–412 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yingzhi Gou
    • 1
  • Aditya Ghose
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chee-Fon Chang
    • 1
  • Hoa Khanh Dam
    • 2
  • Andrew Miller
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Oncology Informatics, Illawarra Health & Medical Research InstituteUniversity of WollongongAustralia
  2. 2.Decision Systems Lab., School of Computer Science and Software EngineeringUniversity of WollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations