Does My Service Have Partners?
Abstract
Controllability for service models is a similar criterion as soundness for workflow models: it establishes a necessary condition for correct behavior of a given service model. Technically, controllability is the problem to decide, for a given service, whether it can interact correctly with at least one other service. Parameters to the problem are the established correctness criterion (e.g. deadlock freedom, livelock freedom, quasi-liveness), the shape of partners (centralized partners versus independently acting partners), or the shape of communication (asynchronous versus synchronous).
In this article, we survey and partly extend various recent results concerning the verification of controllability for Petri net based service models. Significant extensions include the study of livelock freedom as correctness criterion as well as the new results on autonomous multi-port controllability.
Keywords
Transition System Simulation Relation Cooperative Partner Synchronous Communication Service RepositoryPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., Machiraju, V.: Web Services: Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 2.Alves, A., et al.: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0. OASIS Standard (April 2007)Google Scholar
- 3.Badouel, E., Darondeau, P.: Theory of Regions. In: Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1491, Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
- 4.Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Grigori, D., Motahari Nezhad, H.R., Toumani, F.: Developing Adapters for Web Services Integration. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 415–429. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Bracciali, A., Brogi, A., Canal, C.: A formal approach to component adaptation. J. Systems and Software 74(1), 45–54 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Brogi, A., Canal, C., Pimentel, E., Vallecillo, A.: Formalizing Web Service Choreographies. ENTCS 105, 73–94 (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.Bryant, R.: Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. on Computers C-35(8), 677–691 (1986)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 8.Clarke, G., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
- 9.Dehnert, J., Rittgen, P.: Relaxed soundness of business processes. In: Dittrich, K.R., Geppert, A., Norrie, M.C. (eds.) CAiSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2068, pp. 157–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Desel, J., Reisig, W.: The synthesis problem of Petri nets. Acta Informatica 33, 297–315 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 11.Dumas, M., Spork, M., Wang, K.: Adapt or Perish: Algebra and Visual Notation for Service Interface Adaptation. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 65–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Ehrenfeucht, A., Rozenberg, G.: Partial 2-structures. Acta Informatica 27, 315–368 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 13.Fahland, D., Reisig, W.: ASM-based semantics for BPEL: The negative Control Flow. In: Proc. ASM, pp. 131–151 (2005)Google Scholar
- 14.Gottschalk, K.: Web Services Architecture Overview. IBM Whitepaper, IBM DeveloperWorks (September 2000), http://ibm.com/developerWorks/web/library/w-ovr
- 15.Hull, R., Benedikt, M., Christophides, V., Su, J.: E-services: a look behind the curtain. In: Proc. PODS, pp. 1–14. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
- 16.Juhas, G., Lorenz, R., Neumair, C.: Modelling and Control with Modules of Signal Nets. In: Desel, J., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) Lectures on Concurrency and Petri Nets. LNCS, vol. 3098, pp. 585–625. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Kerlin, A.: Bedienbarkeit unter Kausalität. Diploma thesis, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
- 18.Kindler, E.: A compositional partial order semantics for Petri net components. In: Azéma, P., Balbo, G. (eds.) ICATPN 1997. LNCS, vol. 1248, pp. 235–252. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Kindler, E., Martens, A., Reisig, W.: Inter-operability of Workshop Applications – Local Criteria for Global Soundness. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 235–253. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Lohmann, N., Kleine, J.: Fully-automatic Translation of Open Workflow Net Models into Human-readable Abstract BPEL Processes. In: Proc. Modellierung, vol. LNI P-127, pp. 57–72 (2008)Google Scholar
- 21.Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Stahl, C., Weinberg, D.: Analyzing interacting WS-BPEL processes using flexible model generation. Data Knowl. Eng. 64(1), 38–54 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Wolf, K.: Behavioral constraints for services. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 271–287. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Wolf, K.: Operating guidelines for finite-state services. In: Kleijn, J., Yakovlev, A. (eds.) ICATPN 2007. LNCS, vol. 4546, pp. 321–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Lohmann, N., Verbeek, H.M.W., Ouyang, C., Stahl, C., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Comparing and Evaluating Petri Net Semantics for BPEL. Computer Science Report 07/23, Eindhoven University of Technology (2007)Google Scholar
- 25.Martens, A.: Verteilte Geschäftsprozesse – Modellierung und Verifikation mit Hilfe von Web Services. Dissertation, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
- 26.Martens, A.: Analyzing Web Service based Business Processes. In: Cerioli, M. (ed.) FASE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3442, pp. 19–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Massuthe, P., Reisig, W., Schmidt, K.: An Operating Guideline Approach to the SOA. Annals of Mathematics, Computing & Teleinformatics 1(3), 35–43 (2005)Google Scholar
- 28.Massuthe, P., Serebrenik, A., Sidorova, N., Wolf, K.: Can I find a partner? (accepted for IPL)Google Scholar
- 29.Papazoglou, M.P.: Agent-oriented technology in support of e-business. Commun. ACM 44(4), 71–77 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Ramadge, P.J., Wonham, W.M.: Supervisory control of a class of discrete -event processes. SIAM J. Control and Optimization 25(1) (1987)Google Scholar
- 31.Reisig, W., Schmidt, K., Stahl, C.: Kommunizierende Workflow-Services modellieren und analysieren. Informatik - Forschung und Entwicklung, 90–101 (2005)Google Scholar
- 32.Schmidt, K.: Controllability of Open Workflow Nets. In: Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, vol. LNI P-75, pp. 236–249 (2005)Google Scholar
- 33.Stahl, C.: A Petri Net Semantics for BPEL. Technical Report 188, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
- 34.Valmari, A.: A stubborn attack to state explosion. In: Clarke, E., Kurshan, R.P. (eds.) CAV 1990. LNCS, vol. 531, pp. 156–165. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.van der Aalst, W., Lohmannn, N., Massuthe, P., Stahl, C., Wolf, K.: From public views to private views – correctness-by-design for services. In: Dumas, M., Heckel, R. (eds.) WS-FM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4937, pp. 139–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of petri nets in workflow management. J. Circuits, Systems, and Computers 8(1), 21–66 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Weinberg, D.: Analyse der Bedienbarkeit. Diplomarbeit, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
- 38.Wolf, M.: Synchrone und asynchrone Kommunikation in offenen Workflownetzen. Studienarbeit, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (2007)Google Scholar