Advertisement

Patterns for Modeling and Composing Workflows from Grid Services

  • Yousra Bendaly Hlaoui
  • Leila Jemni Ben Ayed
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 24)

Abstract

We propose a set of composition patterns based on UML activity diagrams that support the different forms of matching and integrating Grid service operations in a workflow. The workflows are built on an abstract level using UML activity diagram language and following an MDA composition approach. In addition, we propose a Domain Specific Language (DSL) which extends the UML activity diagram notation allowing a systematic composition of workflows and containing appropriate data to describe a Grid service. These data are useful for the execution of the resulting workflow.

Keywords

UML-Activity Diagram MDA approach Semantic Composition Workflow Grid Services 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C.: Grid services for distributed system integration. IEEE Computer (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bubak, M., Guballa, R., Malawski, M., Rycerz, K.: Workflow composer and service registry for grid applications. Future generation Computer Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Group, O.M.: Uml 2.0 superstructure specification. Technical report (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guballa, R., Hoheisel, A., First, F.: Highly dynamic workflow orchestration for scientific applications. CoreGRID Technical Report, Number TR-0101 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Group, O.M.: Model driven approach. Technical Report omrsc/2001-07-01 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    BendalyHlaoui, Y., JemniBenayed, L.: Toward an uml-based composition of grid services workflows. In: AUPC 2008, 2nd international workshop on Agent-oriented software engineering challenges for Ubiquitous and Pervasive Computing, ACM Digital Library (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Giunchiglia, E., Giunchiglia, F., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Sebastiani, R., Tacchella, A.: Nusmv version 2: An opensource tool for symbolic model checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, p. 359. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gronomo, R., Jaeger, M.: Model driven semantic web service composition. In: APSEC 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dumas, M., Hofsetde, A.: UML activity diagrams as a workflow specification language. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, p. 76. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eshuis, R., Wieringa, R.: Comparing petri net and activity diagram variants for workflow modelling: A quest for reactive petri nets. In: Ehrig, H., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G., Weber, H. (eds.) Petri Net Technology for Communication-Based Systems. LNCS, vol. 2472. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gardner, T.: Uml modelling of automated business processes with a mapping to bpel4ws. In: Cardelli, L. (ed.) ECOOP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2743. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W3C: Web services description language (wsdl). Technical report (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Coalition, O.S.: Owl-s: Semantic markup for web services. Technical Report version 2.0 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yousra Bendaly Hlaoui
    • 1
  • Leila Jemni Ben Ayed
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Laboratory in Technologies of Information and Communication (UTIC)Institute of Sciences and Techniques of TunisTunisTunisia

Personalised recommendations