Advertisement

Dynamic Skipping and Blocking and Dead Path Elimination for Cyclic Workflows

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9850)

Abstract

We propose and study dynamic versions of the classical flexibility constructs skip and block and motivate and define a formal semantics for them. We show that our semantics for dynamic blocking is a generalization of classical dead-path-elimination and solves the long-standing open problem to define dead-path elimination for cyclic workflows. This gives rise to a simple and fully local semantics for inclusive gateways.

Keywords

Outgoing Edge Elimination Step Local Semantic Token Color Exit Edge 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Desel, J., Esparza, J.: Free Choice Petri Nets. Cambridge University Press, New York (1995)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dumas, M., Grosskopf, A., Hettel, T., Wynn, M.T.: Semantics of standard process models with OR-joins. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 41–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fahland, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Model repair - aligning process models to reality. Inf. Syst. 47, 220–243 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fahland, D., Völzer, H.: Dynamic Skipping and Blocking and Dead Path Elimination for Cyclic Workflows (Ext. Version). BPM Center Report BPM-16-05 (2016). http://bpmcenter.org
  5. 5.
    Favre, C., Fahland, D., Völzer, H.: The relationship between workflow graphs and free-choice workflow nets. Inf. Syst. 47, 197–219 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Genrich, H.J., Thiagarajan, P.S.: A theory of bipolar synchronization schemes. Theor. Comput. Sci. 30, 241–318 (1984)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable workflow models. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 17(2), 177–221 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kemper, P., Bause, F.: An efficient polynomial-time algorithm to decide liveness and boundedness of free-choice nets. In: Jensen, K. (ed.) ICATPN 1992. LNCS, vol. 616, pp. 263–278. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kindler, E.: On the semantics of EPCs: resolving the vicious circle. Data Knowl. Eng. 56(1), 23–40 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Murata, T.: Petri nets: properties, analysis and applications. Proc. IEEE 77(4), 541–580 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    OMG: Business process model and notation (BPMN) version 2.0, OMG document number dtc/2010-05-03. Technical report (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPT\({}_{\text{ flex }}\)-supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 10(2), 93–129 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems - Challenges, Methods, Technologies. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    La Rosa, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., Milani, F.P.: Business process variability modeling: a survey. QUT e-Print 61842, QUT, Australia (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Breugel, F., Koshkina, M.: Dead-path-elimination in BPEL4WS. In: Fifth International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD 2005), 6–9 June 2005, St. Malo, France, pp. 192–201. IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vanhatalo, J., Völzer, H., Leymann, F.: Faster and more focused control-flow analysis for business process models through SESE decomposition. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 43–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Völzer, H.: A new semantics for the inclusive converging gateway in safe processes. In: Hull, R., Mendling, J., Tai, S. (eds.) BPM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6336, pp. 294–309. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weidlich, M., Großkopf, A., Barros, A.P.: Realising dead path elimination in BPMN. In: 2009 IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing, CEC 2009, Vienna, Austria, 20–23 July 2009, pp. 345–352. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weske, M.: Workflow management systems: formal foundation, conceptual design, implementation aspects. Habilitationsschrift Fachbereich Mathematik und Informatik, Universität Münster (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weske, M.: Formal foundation and conceptual design of dynamic adaptations in a workflow management system. In: 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-34), 3–6 January 2001, Maui, Hawaii, USA. IEEE Computer Society (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.IBM Research - ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations