Artifact-Centric Workflow Dominance

  • Diego Calvanese
  • Giuseppe De Giacomo
  • Richard Hull
  • Jianwen Su
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5900)

Abstract

In this paper we initiate a study on comparing artifact-centric workflow schemas, in terms of the ability of one schema to emulate the possible behaviors of another schema. Artifact-centric workflows are centered around “business artifacts”, which contain both a data schema, which can hold all of the data about a key business entity as it passes through a workflow, along with a lifecycle schema, which specifies the possible ways that the entity can evolve through the workflow. In this paper, the data schemas for artifact types are finite sets of attribute-value pairs, and the lifecycle schemas are specified as sets of condition-action rules, where the condition is evaluated against the current snapshot of the artifact, and where the actions are external services (or “tasks”), which read a subset of the attributes of an artifact, which write onto a subset of the attributes, and which are performed by an entity outside of the workflow system (often a human). The services are also characterized by pre- and post-conditions, in the spirit of semantic web services. To compare artifact-centric workflows, we introduce the notion of “dominance”, which intuitively captures the fact that all executions of a workflow can be emulated by a second workflow. (In the current paper, the emulation is focused only on the starting and ending snapshots of the possible enactments of the two workflows.) In fact, dominance is a parametric notion that depends on the characterization of the policies that govern the execution of the services invoked by the workflows. In this paper, we study in detail the case of “absolute dominance”, in which this policy places no constraints on the possible service executions. We provide decidability and complexity results for bounded and unbounded workflow executions in the cases where the values in an artifact range over an infinite structure, such as the integers, the rationals, or the reals, possibly with order, addition, or multiplication.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ben-Or, M., Kozen, D., Reif, J.: The complexity of elementary algebra and geometry. J. of Computer and System Sciences 32(2), 251–264 (1986)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    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)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhattacharya, K., et al.: A model-driven approach to industrializing discovery processes in pharmaceutical research. IBM Systems Journal 44(1), 145–162 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhattacharya, K., Gerede, C., Hull, R., Liu, R., Su, J.: Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 288–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deutsch, A., Hull, R., Patrizi, F., Vianu, V.: Automatic verification of data-centric business processes. In: Proc. of the 12th Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT 2009), pp. 252–267 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fischer, M.J., Rabin, M.O.: Super-exponential complexity of Presburger arithmetic. In: SIAM-AMS Proceedings, vol. 7, pp. 27–41 (1974)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fritz, C., Hull, R., Su, J.: Automatic construction of simple artifact-based workflows. In: Proc. of the 12th Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT 2009), pp. 225–238 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guo, S., Sun, W., Weiss, M.A.: Solving satisfiability and implication problems in database systems. ACM Trans. on Database Systems 21(2), 270–293 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kanellakis, P.C., Kuper, G.M., Revesz, P.Z.: Contraint query languages. J. of Computer and System Sciences 51, 26–52 (1995)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Matiyasevich, Y.: Hilbert’s 10th Problem. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Narayanan, S., McIlraith, S.: Simulation, verification and automated composition of web services. In: Proc. of the 11th Int. World Wide Web Conf. WWW 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts: An approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3), 428–445 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Presburger, M.: Über die Vollständigkeit eines gewissen Systems der Arithmetik ganzer Zahlen, in welchem die Addition als einzige Operation hervortritt. In: Comptes rendus du premier Congrès des Mathématiciens des Pays Slaves, Warszawa, pp. 92–101 (1929)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Renegar, J.: On the computational complexity and geometry of the first-order theory of the reals. Journal of Symbolic Computation 13, 255–352 (1992)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Revesz, P.Z.: A closed-form evaluation for Datalog queries with integer (gap)-order constraints. Theoretical Computer Science 116, 117–149 (1993)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Strosnider, J., Nandi, P., Kumarn, S., Ghosh, S., Arsanjani, A.: Model-driven synthesis of SOA solutions. IBM Systems Journal 47(3), 415–432 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tarski, A.: A Decision Method for Elementary Algebra and Geometry. University of California Press, Berkeley (1951)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diego Calvanese
    • 1
  • Giuseppe De Giacomo
    • 2
  • Richard Hull
    • 3
  • Jianwen Su
    • 4
  1. 1.KRDB Research CentreFree University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Informatica e SistemisticaSapienza Università di RomaRomaItaly
  3. 3.IBM T.J. Watson Research CenterNYU.S.A.
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of California at Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations