Towards Automating Business Process Compensation Scoping Logic

  • Anis BoubakerEmail author
  • Hafedh Mili
  • Abderrahmane Leshob
  • Yasmine Charif
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 209)


Business process compensation is an error recovery strategy aiming at semantically reversing the effects of an interrupted business process execution and restoring it to a valid state. Studies have shown that modeling error handling in general, and compensation in particular, represents the bulk of process design efforts. To that end, we proposed in a previous work an approach to model semi-automatically compensation processes based on a business analysis within the REA framework, restoring it to its initial state. However, we argue that it is neither practical nor desirable to cancel the whole process in some situations. Instead, the process should be reversed to an intermediate state from which it could resume its execution. This work aims at solving this compensation scoping problem by inferring the possible “rollback points”. Our approach relies on a resource flow analysis within the context of an OCL-based behavioral specification of business process activities. In this paper, we present our slicing algorithm and lay our ground ideas on how we could identify possible candidates as process’ rollback activities.


Business Process Interruption Point Object Constraint Language Business Process Model Credit Line 
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.
    Awad, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Efficient compliance checking using BPMN-Q and temporal logic. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 326–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balasubramanian, S., Gupta, M.: Structural metrics for goal based business process design and evaluation. BPM Journal 11(6), 680–694 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Best, E., Rakow, A.: A Slicing technique for business processes. In: UNISCON 2008, Klagenfurt, Austria, pp. 45–51 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boubaker, A., Cherif, D., Leshob, A., Mili, H.: Value-chain discovery from business process models. In: Frank, U., Loucopoulos, P., Pastor, Ó., Petrounias, I. (eds.) PoEM 2014. LNBIP, vol. 197, pp. 26–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boubaker, A., Mili, H., Charif, Y., Leshob, A.: Methodology and tool for business process compensation design. In: EDOC Workshops, Vancouver, Canada (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boubaker, A., Mili, H., Charif, Y., Leshob, A.: Towards a framework for modeling business compensation processes. In: Nurcan, S., Proper, H.A., Soffer, P., Krogstie, J., Schmidt, R., Halpin, T., Bider, I. (eds.) BPMDS 2013 and EMMSAD 2013. LNBIP, vol. 147, pp. 139–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cabot, J.: From declarative to imperative UML / OCL operation specifications. In: ER 2007, Auckland, New Zealand, pp. 198–213 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cabot, J., Clarisó., Riera, D.: UMLtoCSP:tool for the formal verification of UML/OCL models using constraint programming. In: ASE, pp. 547–548 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cabot, J., Conesa, J.: Automatic integrity constraint evolution due to model subtract operations. In: Wang, S., Tanaka, K., Zhou, S., Ling, T.-W., Guan, J., Yang, D., Grandi, F., Mangina, E.E., Song, I.-Y., Mayr, H.C. (eds.) ER Workshops 2004. LNCS, vol. 3289, pp. 350–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Casati, F., Cugola, G.: Error handling in process support systems. In: Romanovsky, A., Cheraghchi, H.S., Lindskov Knudsen, J., Babu, C.S. (eds.) ECOOP-WS 2000. LNCS, vol. 2022, pp. 251–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Info. and Soft. Technology 50(12), 1281–1294 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eclipse Foundation. Eclipe Modeling Framework.
  13. 13.
    Eclipse Foundation. EclipseOCL v. 5.0.3.
  14. 14.
    Ge, X., Paige, R.F., McDermid, J.A.: Failures of a business process in enterprise systems. In: Cruz-Cunha, M.M., Varajão, J., Powell, P., Martinho, R. (eds.) CENTERIS 2011, Part I. CCIS, vol. 219, pp. 139–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Golani, M., Gal, A.: Flexible business process management using forward stepping and alternative paths. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Approaches for business process model complexity metrics. In Tech. for Business Information Systems, pp. 13–24. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kosiuczenko, P.: Specification of invariability in OCL. Software & Systems Modeling 12(2), 415–434 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCarthy, W.E.: The REA Accounting Model. The Accounting Review 57(3), 554–578 (1982)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mili, H., Godin, R., Tremblay, G., Dorfeuille, W.: Towards a methodology for designing compensation processes in long-running business transactions. In: MCETECH 2006, Montreal, pp. 137–148 (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    OMG. Object Constraint Language (2012).
  21. 21.
    Rabbi, F., Wang, H., MacCaull, W., Rutle, A.: A Model Slicing Method for Workflow Verification. Elect. Notes in Theoretical CS 295, 79–93 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Workflow exception patterns. In: Martinez, F.H., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4001, pp. 288–302. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thaisongsuwan, T., Senivongse, T.: Applying software fault tolerance patterns to WS-BPEL processes. In: 8th JCCSE Conference, pp. 269–274 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tip, F.: A Survey of Program Slicing Techniques. Journal of programming languages 3(3), 121–189 (1995)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Hirnschall, A., Verbeek, H.M.W.E.: An alternative way to analyze workflow graphs. In: Pidduck, A.B., Mylopoulos, J., Woo, C.C., Ozsu, M.T. (eds.) CAiSE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2348, pp. 535–552. Springer, Heidelberg (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weiser, M.: Program Slicing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-10(4) 352–357 (1984)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures, 2nd edn. Springer (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anis Boubaker
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hafedh Mili
    • 1
  • Abderrahmane Leshob
    • 1
  • Yasmine Charif
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Quebec at MontrealMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Xerox Webster Research CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations