Correctness-Preserving Configuration of Business Process Models

  • Wil M. P. van der Aalst
  • Marlon Dumas
  • Florian Gottschalk
  • Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede
  • Marcello La Rosa
  • Jan Mendling
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4961)

Abstract

Reference process models capture recurrent business operations in a given domain such as procurement or logistics. These models are intended to be configured to fit the requirements of specific organizations or projects, leading to individualized process models that are subsequently used for domain analysis or solution design. Although the advantages of reusing reference process models compared to designing process models from scratch are widely accepted, the methods employed to configure reference process models are manual and error-prone. In particular, analysts are left with the burden of ensuring the correctness of the individualized process models and to manually fix errors. This paper proposes a foundation for configuring reference process models incrementally and in a way that ensures the correctness of the individualized process models, both with respect to syntax and behavioral semantics. Specifically, assuming the reference process model is behaviorally sound, the individualized process models are guaranteed to be sound.

Keywords

Reference process model model configuration Petri net 

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of Workflow Nets. In: Azéma, P., Balbo, G. (eds.) ICATPN 1997. LNCS, vol. 1248, pp. 407–426. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Basten, T.: Inheritance of workflows: an approach to tackling problems related to change. Theoretical Computer Science 270(1-2), 125–203 (2002)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abdulla, P.A., Iyer, S.P., Nyln, A.: SAT-solving the coverability problem for Petri nets. Formal Methods in System Design 24(1), 25–43 (2004)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antkiewicz, M., Czarnecki, K.: FeaturePlugIn: Feature modeling plug-in for Eclipse. In: Proceedings of the 2004 OOPSLA workshop on eclipse technology eXchange, pp. 67–72 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Batory, D.S.: Feature Models, Grammars, and Propositional Formulas. In: Obbink, H., Pohl, K. (eds.) SPLC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3714, pp. 7–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curran, T., Keller, G.: SAP R/3 Business Blueprint: Understanding the Business Process Reference Model, Upper Saddle River (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Czarnecki, K., Antkiewicz, M.: Mapping Features to Models: A Template Approach Based on Superimposed Variants. In: Glück, R., Lowry, M. (eds.) GPCE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3676, pp. 422–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Staged configuration using feature models. In: Nord, R.L. (ed.) SPLC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3154, pp. 266–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Desel, J., Esparza, J.: Free Choice Petri Nets. In: Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 40, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Estublier, J., Casallas, R.: The Adele Software Configuration Manager. In: Configuration Management, pp. 99–139. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H.: Configurable Process Models – A Foundational Approach. In: Becker, J., Delfmann, P. (eds.) Reference Modeling, pp. 59–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H.: SAP WebFlow Made Configurable: Unifying Workflow Templates into a Configurable Model. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 262–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable Workflow Models. BETA Working Paper 222, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    La Rosa, M., Lux, J., Seidel, S., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-driven Configuration of Reference Process Models. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 424–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Minato, S., Ishiura, N., Yajima, S.: Shared Binary Decision Diagram with Attributed Edges for Efficient Boolean function Manipulation. In: Proceedings of the 27th ACM/IEEE Conference on Design Automation, pp. 52–57 (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murata, T.: Petri Nets: Properties, Analysis and Applications. Proceedings of the IEEE 77(4), 541–580 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pohl, K., Böckle, G., van der Linden, F.: Software Product-line Engineering – Foundations, Principles and Techniques. Springer, Berlin (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A Configurable Reference Modelling Language. Information Systems 32(1), 1–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sadiq, S.W., Orlowska, M.E., Sadiq, W.: Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Information Systems 30(5), 349–378 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stephens, S.: The Supply Chain Council and the SCOR Reference Model. Supply Chain Management - An International Journal 1(1), 9–13 (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taylor, C., Probst, C.: Business Process Reference Model Languages: Experiences from BPI Projects. In: Proceedings of INFORMATIK 2003, Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik e. V (GI), pp. 259–263 (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Turkay, E., Gokhale, A.S., Natarajan, B.: Addressing the Middleware Configuration Challenges using Model-based Techniques. In: Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Southeast Regional Conference, Huntsville AL, pp. 166–170. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Verbeek, H.M.W., Basten, T., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Diagnosing Workflow Processes using Woflan. The Computer Journal 44(4), 246–279 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wil M. P. van der Aalst
    • 1
    • 2
  • Marlon Dumas
    • 2
    • 3
  • Florian Gottschalk
    • 1
  • Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede
    • 2
  • Marcello La Rosa
    • 2
  • Jan Mendling
    • 2
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Queensland University of TechnologyAustralia
  3. 3.University of TartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations