Facilitating Workflow Interoperation Using Artifact-Centric Hubs

  • Richard Hull
  • Nanjangud C. Narendra
  • Anil Nigam
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5900)


Enabling interoperation between workflows, and between web services, continues to be a fundamental challenge. This paper proposes a new approach to interoperation based on hubs that are designed using “business artifacts”, a data-centric paradigm for workflow and business process specification. The artifact-centric interoperation hubs are focused primarily on facilitating communication and business-level synchronization between relatively autonomous stakeholders (and stakeholder organizations). Interoperation hubs provide a centralized, computerized rendezvous point, where stakeholders can read or write data of common interest and check the current status of an aggregate process, and from which they can receive notifications about events of interest. The paper describes the approach, including an extended example, access restrictions that can be placed on stakeholders, some preliminary theoretical results, and a discussion of work towards a prototype system that supports interoperation hubs.


Business Artifact Interoperation Service Workflow 


  1. 1.
    Abiteboul, S., Beeri, C.: The power of languages for the manipulation of complex values. The VLDB Journal 4(4), 727–794 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abiteboul, S., Bidoit, N.: Nonfirst normal form relations: An algebra allowing data restructuring. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 33, 361–393 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agarwal, V., Chafle, G., Mittal, S., Srivastava, B.: Understanding Approaches for Web Service Composition and Execution. In: Proc. of Compute 2008, Bangalore, India (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barros, A.P., Dumas, M., Oaks, P.: Standards for web service choreography and orchestration: Status and perspectives. In: Bussler, C.J., Haller, A. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3812, pp. 61–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhattacharya, K., Caswell, N.S., Kumaran, S., Nigam, A., Wu, F.Y.: Artifact-centered operational modeling: Lessons from customer engagements. IBM Systems Journal 46(4), 703–721 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhattacharya, K., et al.: A model-driven approach to industrializing discovery processes in pharmaceutical research. IBM Systems Journal 44(1), 145–162 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chao, T., et al.: Artifact-based transformation of IBM Global Financing: A case study, 2009. To appear Intl. Conf. on Business Process Management (BPM) (September 2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohn, D., Dhoolia, P. (Terry) Heath III, F.F., Pinel, F., Vergo, J.: Siena: From powerpoint to web App in 5 minutes. In: Bouguettaya, A., Krueger, I., Margaria, T. (eds.) ICSOC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5364, pp. 722–723. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Decker, G., Zaha, J.M., Dumas, M.: Execution semantics for service choreographies. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 163–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    (Terry) Heath III, F.F., Pinel, F.: Siena user’s guide (2009) (in preparation)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hull, R.: Artifact-centric business process models: Brief survey of research results and challenges. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2008, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5331, pp. 1152–1163. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: A New Paradigm for the Enactment and Dynamic Adaptation of Data-Driven Process Structures. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nandi, P., Kumaran, S.: Adaptive Business Objects - A New Component Model for Business Integration. In: Proceedings of ICEIS 2005, Miami, FL, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts: An approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3), 428–445 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business Artifacts: An Approach to Operational Specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3) (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peltz, C.: Web services orchestration and choreography. IEEE Computer 36(10), 46–52 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roth, M.A., Korth, H.F., Silberschatz, A.: Extended algebra and calculus for nested relational databases. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 13(4), 389–417 (1988)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sabiv, Y., Yannakakis, M.: Equivalences among relational expressions with the union and difference operators. Journal of the ACM 27(4), 633–655 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Strosnider, J.K., Nandi, P., Kumarn, S., Ghosh, S., Arsanjani, A.: Model-driven synthesis of SOA solutions. IBM Systems Journal 47(3), 415–432 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Barthelmess, P., Ellis, C.A., Wainer, J.: Proclets: A framework for lightweight interacting workflow processes. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 10(4), 443–481 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Hull
    • 1
  • Nanjangud C. Narendra
    • 2
  • Anil Nigam
    • 1
  1. 1.IBM T.J. Watson Research CenterUSA
  2. 2.IBM India Research LabBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations