Advertisement

Verification and Validation of UML Artifact-Centric Business Process Models

  • Montserrat EstañolEmail author
  • Maria-Ribera Sancho
  • Ernest Teniente
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9097)

Abstract

This paper presents a way of checking the correctness of artifact-centric business process models defined using the BAUML framework. To ensure that these models are free of errors, we propose an approach to verify (i.e. there are no internal mistakes) and to validate them (i.e. the model complies with the business requirements). This approach is based on translating these models into logic and then encoding the desirable properties as satisfiability problems of derived predicates. In this way, we can then use a tool to check if these properties are fulfilled.

Keywords

Artifact-Centric BPM UML Verification Validation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., et al.: Verification of description logic knowledge and action bases. In: Raedt, L.D., et al. (eds.) ECAI. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 242, pp. 103–108. IOS Press (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., et al.: Verification of relational data-centric dynamic systems with external services. In: PODS, pp. 163–174. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Montali, M., Santoso, A.: Ontology-based governance of data-aware processes. In: Krötzsch, M., Straccia, U. (eds.) RR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7497, pp. 25–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calvanese, D., Montali, M., Estañol, M., Teniente, E.: Verifiable UML artifact-centric business process models. In: Li, J., Wang, X.S., Garofalakis, M.N., Soboroff, I., Suel, T., Wang, M. (eds.) CIKM 2014, pp. 1289–1298. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Choppy, C., Klai, K., Zidani, H.: Formal verification of UML state diagrams: a Petri net based approach. ACM SIGSOFT Soft. Eng. Notes 36(1), 1–8 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Damaggio, E., Deutsch, A., Vianu, V.: Artifact systems with data dependencies and arithmetic. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 37(3), 1–36 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eshuis, R.: Symbolic model checking of UML activity diagrams. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 15(1), 1–38 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Estañol, M., Sancho, M.-R., Teniente, E.: Reasoning on UML data-centric business process models. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 437–445. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gonzalez, P., Griesmayer, A., Lomuscio, A.: Model checking GSM-based multi-agent systems. In: Lomuscio, A.R., Nepal, S., Patrizi, F., Benatallah, B., Brandić, I. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8377, pp. 54–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heath III, F.T., Boaz, D., Gupta, M., Vaculín, R., Sun, Y., Hull, R., Limonad, L.: Barcelona: a design and runtime environment for declarative artifact-centric BPM. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 705–709. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hull, R.: Artifact-centric business process models: brief survey of research results and challenges. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2008, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5332, pp. 1152–1163. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lucas, F.J., Molina, F., Álvarez, J.A.T.: A systematic review of UML model consistency management. Information & Software Technology 51(12), 1631–1645 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Queralt, A., Teniente, E.: Reasoning on UML conceptual schemas with operations. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 47–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Queralt, A., Teniente, E.: Verification and validation of UML conceptual schemas with OCL constraints. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 21(2), 13 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rull, G., Farré, C., Teniente, E., Urpí, T.: Providing explanations for database schema validation. In: Bhowmick, S.S., Küng, J., Wagner, R. (eds.) DEXA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5181, pp. 660–667. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Solomakhin, D., Montali, M., Tessaris, S., De Masellis, R.: Verification of artifact-centric systems: decidability and modeling issues. In: Basu, S., Pautasso, C., Zhang, L., Fu, X. (eds.) ICSOC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8274, pp. 252–266. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weber, I., Hoffmann, J., Mendling, J.: Beyond soundness: on the verification of semantic business process models. Distributed and Parallel Databases 27(3), 271–343 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Montserrat Estañol
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maria-Ribera Sancho
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ernest Teniente
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Barcelona Supercomputing CenterBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations