Norm Compliance in Business Process Modeling

  • Guido Governatori
  • Antonino Rotolo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6403)


We investigate the concept of norm compliance in business process modeling. In particular we propose an extension of Formal Contract Logic (FCL), a combination of defeasible logic and a logic of violation, with a richer deontic language capable of capture many different facets of normative requirements. The resulting logic, called Process Compliance Logic (PCL), is able to capture both semantic compliance and structural compliance. This paper focuses on structural compliance, that is we show how PCL can capture obligations concerning the structure of a business process.


Business Process Deontic Logic Business Process Model Norm Compliance Business Process Model Notation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Carmo, J., Jones, A.: Deontic logic and contrary to duties. In: Gabbay, D., Guenther, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn., pp. 265–343. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Governatori, G.: Representing business contracts in RuleML. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 14, 181–216 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: An algorithm for business process compliance. In: Sartor, G. (ed.) Jurix 2008, pp. 186–191. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Governatori, G., Hulstijn, J., Riveret, R., Rotolo, A.: Characterising deadlines in temporal modal defeasible logic. In: Orgun, M.A., Thornton, J. (eds.) AI 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4830, pp. 486–496. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: A conceptually rich model of business process compliance. In: Link, S., Ghose, A. (eds.) APCCM 2010, CRPIT, ACS (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Logic of violations: A Gentzen system for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations. Australasian Journal of Logic 4, 193–215 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2, 255–287 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Changing legal systems: Legal abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. The Logic Journal of IGPL 18, 157–194 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vanhatalo, J., Völzer, H., Leymann, F.: Faster and more focused control-flow analysis for business process models through sese decomposition. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 43–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sadiq, S.W., Governatori, G., Namiri, K.: Modeling control objectives for business process compliance. [26] 149–164Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lam, H.-P., Governatori, G.: The making of SPINdle. In: Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2009. LNCS, vol. 5858, pp. 315–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van der Aalst, W.M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14, 5–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow data patterns: Identification, representation and tool support. In: Delcambre, L.M.L., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) ER 2005. LNCS, vol. 3716, pp. 353–368. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A declarative approach for flexible business processes management. [25], 169–180Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: Designing compliant business processes with obligations and permissions. [25], 5–14Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Küster, J.M., Ryndina, K., Gall, H.: Generation of business process models for object life cycle compliance. [26], 165–181Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Giblin, C., Müller, S., Pfitzmann, B.: From regulatory policies to event monitoring rules: Towards model driven compliance automation. Technical report, IBM Zurich Lab (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Agrawal, R., Johnson, C.M., Kiernan, J., Leymann, F.: Taming compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley internal controls using database technology. In: Liu, L., Reuter, A., Whang, K.Y., Zhang, J. (eds.) ICDE, p. 92. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Farrell, A.D.H., Sergot, M.J., Sallé, M., Bartolini, C.: Using the event calculus for tracking the normative state of contracts. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 14, 99–129 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Desai, N., Narendra, N.C., Singh, M.P.: Checking correctness of business contracts via commitments. In: Proc. AAMAS 2008, pp. 787–794 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu, Y., Müller, S., Xu, K.: A static compliance-checking framework for business process models. IBM Systems Journal 46, 335–362 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rozinat, A., van Der Aalst, W.M.: Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Information Systems 33, 64–95 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roman, D., Kifer, M.: Reasoning about the behaviour of semantic web services with concurrent transaction logic. In: VLDB, pp. 627–638 (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gregory, S., Paschali, M.: A prolog-based language for workflow programming. In: Murphy, A.L., Vitek, J. (eds.) COORDINATION 2007. LNCS, vol. 4467, pp. 56–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.): BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.): BPM Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guido Governatori
    • 1
  • Antonino Rotolo
    • 2
  1. 1.NICTA Queensland Research Lab.Australia
  2. 2.CIRSFID, University of BolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations