Advertisement

Why Does My Service Have No Partners?

  • Niels Lohmann
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5387)

Abstract

Controllability is a fundamental correctness criterion for interacting service models. A service model is controllable if there exists a partner service such that their composition is free of deadlocks and livelocks. Whereas controllability can be automatically decided, the existing decision algorithm gives no information about the reasons of why a service model is uncontrollable. This paper introduces a diagnosis framework to find these reasons which can help to fix uncontrollable service models.

Keywords

Controllability diagnosis partner synthesis verification 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Papazoglou, M.P.: Agent-oriented technology in support of e-business. Commun. ACM 44, 71–77 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., Machiraju, V.: Web Services: Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schmidt, K.: Controllability of open workflow nets. In: EMISA 2005, GI. LNI, vol. P-75, pp. 236–249 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lohmann, N.: Correcting deadlocking service choreographies using a simulation-based graph edit distance. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 132–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of Petri nets to workflow management. Journal of Circuits, Systems and Computers 8, 21–66 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Verbeek, H.M.W., Basten, T., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Diagnosing workflow processes using Woflan. Comput. J. 44, 246–279 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Massuthe, P., Reisig, W., Schmidt, K.: An operating guideline approach to the SOA. Annals of Mathematics, Computing & Teleinformatics 1, 35–43 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reisig, W.: Petri Nets. EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science edn. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lohmann, N.: A feature-complete Petri net semantics for WS-BPEL 2.0. In: Dumas, M., Heckel, R. (eds.) WS-FM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4937, pp. 77–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lohmann, N., Kleine, J.: Fully-automatic translation of open workflow net models into simple abstract BPEL processes. In: Modellierung 2008, GI. LNI, vol. 127, pp. 57–72 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alves, A., et al.: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0. OASIS Standard, April 11. OASIS (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    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
  13. 13.
    Massuthe, P., Serebrenik, A., Sidorova, N., Wolf, K.: Can I find a partner? Undecidablity of partner existence for open nets. Inf. Process. Lett. (2008) (accepted)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wolf, K.: Does my service have partners? In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) ToPNoC II. LNCS, vol. 5460, pp. 152–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Desel, J., Esparza, J.: Free Choice Petri Nets. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dehnert, J., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Bridging the gap between business models and workflow specifications. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 13, 289–332 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lautenbach, K., Ridder, H.: Liveness in bounded Petri nets which are covered by T-invariants. In: Valette, R. (ed.) ICATPN 1994. LNCS, vol. 815, pp. 358–375. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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
  20. 20.
    Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Stahl, C., Weinberg, D.: Analyzing interacting WS-BPEL processes using flexible model generation. Data Knowl. Eng. 64, 38–54 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weinberg, D.: Efficient controllability analysis of open nets. In: Bruni, R., Wolf, K. (eds.) WS-FM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5387, pp. 224–239. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Niels Lohmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikUniversität RostockRostockGermany

Personalised recommendations