Advertisement

Animating Multiple Instances in BPMN Collaborations: From Formal Semantics to Tool Support

  • Flavio Corradini
  • Chiara Muzi
  • Barbara Re
  • Lorenzo Rossi
  • Francesco Tiezzi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11080)

Abstract

The increasing adoption of modelling methods contributes to a better understanding of the flow of processes, from the internal behaviour of a single organisation to a wider perspective where several organisations exchange messages. In this regard, BPMN collaboration is a suitable modelling abstraction. Even if this is a widely accepted notation, only a limited effort has been expended in formalising its semantics, especially for what it concerns the interplay among control features, data handling and exchange of messages in scenarios requiring multiple instances of interacting participants. In this paper, we face the problem of providing a formal semantics for BPMN collaborations including multiple instances, while taking into account the data perspective. Beyond defining a novel formalisation, we also provide a BPMN collaboration animator tool faithfully implementing the formal semantics. Its visualisation facilities support designers in debugging multi-instance collaboration models.

References

  1. 1.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN V 2.0) (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Suchenia, A., Potempa, T., Ligȩza, A., Jobczyk, K., Kluza, K.: Selected approaches towards taxonomy of business process anomalies. In: Pełech-Pilichowski, T., Mach-Król, M., Olszak, C.M. (eds.) Advances in Business ICT: New Ideas from Ongoing Research. SCI, vol. 658, pp. 65–85. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47208-9_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50(12), 1281–1294 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Decker, G., Dijkman, R., Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L.: Transforming BPMN diagrams into YAWL nets. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 386–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7_30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wong, P.Y.H., Gibbons, J.: A process semantics for BPMN. In: Liu, S., Maibaum, T., Araki, K. (eds.) ICFEM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5256, pp. 355–374. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88194-0_22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Börger, E., Thalheim, B.: A method for verifiable and validatable business process modeling. In: Börger, E., Cisternino, A. (eds.) Advances in Software Engineering. LNCS, vol. 5316, pp. 59–115. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89762-0_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Gorp, P., Dijkman, R.: A visual token-based formalization of BPMN 2.0 based on in-place transformations. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(2), 365–394 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hermann, A., et al.: Collaborative business process management - a literature-based analysis of methods for supporting model understandability. In: WI, pp. 286–300 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Becker, J., Kugeler, M., Rosemann, M.: Process Management: A Guide for the Design of Business Processes. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24798-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Emens, R., Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A.: The dynamic visualization of business process models: a prototype and evaluation. In: Reichert, M., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2015. LNBIP, vol. 256, pp. 559–570. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42887-1_45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Momotko, M., Nowicki, B.: Visualisation of (distributed) process execution based on extended BPMN. In: DEXA, pp. 280–284. IEEE (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Allweyer, T., Schweitzer, S.: A tool for animating BPMN token flow. In: Mendling, J., Weidlich, M. (eds.) BPMN 2012. LNBIP, vol. 125, pp. 98–106. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33155-8_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73522-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Corradini, F., Fornari, F., Muzi, C., Polini, A., Re, B., Tiezzi, F.: On avoiding erroneous synchronization in BPMN processes. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2017. LNBIP, vol. 288, pp. 106–119. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59336-4_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Corradini, F., Polini, A., Re, B., Tiezzi, F.: An operational semantics of BPMN collaboration. In: Braga, C., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FACS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9539, pp. 161–180. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28934-2_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Corradini, F., Muzi, C., Re, B., Rossi, L., Tiezzi, F.: Global vs. local semantics of BPMN 2.0 Or-Join. In: Tjoa, A.M., Bellatreche, L., Biffl, S., van Leeuwen, J., Wiedermann, J. (eds.) SOFSEM 2018. LNCS, vol. 10706, pp. 321–336. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73117-9_23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corradini, F., Muzi, C., Re, B., Rossi, L., Tiezzi, F.: Animating multiple instances in BPMN collaborations. Technical report, University of Camerino (2018). http://pros.unicam.it/mida/
  18. 18.
    Pugliese, R., Tiezzi, F.: A calculus for orchestration of web services. J. Appl. Log. 10(1), 2–31 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meyer, A., Pufahl, L., Fahland, D., Weske, M.: Modeling and enacting complex data dependencies in business processes. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 171–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40176-3_14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meyer, A., et al.: Data perspective in process choreographies: modeling and execution. In: Techn. Ber. BPM Center Report BPM-13-29 (2013). BPMcenter.org
  21. 21.
    Kheldoun, A., Barkaoui, K., Ioualalen, M.: Formal verification of complex business processes based on high-level Petri nets. Inf. Sci. 385–386, 39–54 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    El-Saber, N.A.: CMMI-CM compliance checking of formal BPMN models using Maude. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wohed, P., et al.: Pattern-based analysis of UML activity diagrams. Beta, Research School for Operations Management and Logistics, Eindhoven (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van Der Aalst, W.M., Ter Hofstede, A.H.: YAWL: yet another workflow language. Inf. Syst. 30(4), 245–275 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gómez-López, M.T., Pérez-Álvarez, J.M., Varela-Vaca, A.J., Gasca, R.M.: Guiding the creation of choreographed processes with multiple instances based on data models. In: Dumas, M., Fantinato, M. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNBIP, vol. 281, pp. 239–251. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58457-7_18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Knuplesch, D., et al.: Data-aware interaction in distributed and collaborative workflows: modeling, semantics, correctness. In: CollaborateCom, pp. 223–232. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hahn, M., Breitenbücher, U., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Modeling and execution of data-aware choreographies: an overview. Comput. Sci.-Res. Dev. 33, 1–12 (2017)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    OASIS WS BPEL TC: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0. Technical report, OASIS, April 2007Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Flavio Corradini
    • 1
  • Chiara Muzi
    • 1
  • Barbara Re
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Rossi
    • 1
  • Francesco Tiezzi
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Science and TechnologyUniversity of CamerinoCamerinoItaly

Personalised recommendations