Advertisement

Resolving Business Process Interference via Dynamic Reconfiguration

  • Nick R. T. P. van Beest
  • Pavel Bulanov
  • Hans Wortmann
  • Alexander Lazovik
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6470)

Abstract

For business processes supported by service-oriented information systems, concurrent execution of business processes still may yield undesired business outcomes as a result of process interference. For instance, concurrent processes may partially depend on a semantically identical process variable, causing inconsistencies during process execution. Current design-time verification of service-based processes is not always sufficient to identify these issues. To identify and resolve potentially erroneous situations, run-time handling of interference is required. In this paper, dependency scopes are defined to represent the dependencies between processes and data sources. In addition, intervention patterns are developed to repair inconsistencies using dynamic reconfiguration during execution of the pro-cess. These concepts are implemented on top of a BPMS platform and tested on a real case study, based on the implementation of a Dutch Law in e-Government.

Keywords

business process configuration variability concurrency 

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow Patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(1), 5–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data and Knowledge Engineering 53(2), 129–162 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: YAWL: Yet Another Workflow Language. Information Systems 30(4), 245–275 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aiello, M., Bulanov, P., Groefsema, H.: Requirements and Tools for Variability Management. In: IEEE workshop on Requirements Engineering for Services at IEEE COMPSAC (2010) (to appear) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) 2.0, Request For Proposal. OMG Document: BMI/2007-06-05 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: The ADEPT project: a decade of research and development for robust and flexible process support. Computer Science - R&D 23(2), 81–97 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Salem, K.: Sagas. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on Management of Data, pp. 249–259 (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klai, K., Tata, S., Desel, J.: Symbolic Abstraction and Deadlock-Freeness Verification of Inter-enterprise Processes. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 294–309. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li, Q., Zhou, J., Peng, Q.R., Li, C.Q., Wang, C., Wu, J., Shao, B.E.: Business processes oriented heterogeneous systems integration platform for networked enterprises. Computers In Industry 61(2), 127–144 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, M.H., Sidorova, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Constraint-Based Workflow Models: Change Made Easy. In: OTM Conferences, vol. (1), pp. 77–94 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Correctness Criteria for Dynamic Changes in Workflow Systems – A Survey. Data and Knowledge Engineering 50(1), 9–34 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sadiq, S., Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.: Pockets of Flexibility in Workflow Specifications. In: Kunii, H.S., Jajodia, S., Sølvberg, A. (eds.) ER 2001. LNCS, vol. 2224, pp. 513–526. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schonenberg, M.H., Mans, R., Russell, N., Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Flexibility: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches. In: CIAO! / EOMAS, LNBIP, vol. 10, pp. 13–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Trčka, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Sidorova, N.: Data-Flow Anti-Patterns: Discovering Data-Flow Errors in Workflows. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 425–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van Beest, N.R.T.P., Szirbik, N.B., Wortmann, J.C.: A Vision for Agile Model-driven Enterprise Information Systems. In: Proc. of the 11th Int. Conf. on EIS, Inf. Syst. Analysis and Specification, pp. 94–188 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Beest, N.R.T.P., Szirbik, N.B., Wortmann, J.C.: Assessing The Interference In Concurrent Business Processes. In: Proc. of the 12th Int. Conf. on EIS, Inf. Syst. Analysis and Specification (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    WfMC: The Workflow Management Coalition Specification, Terminology & Glossary. Document Number WFMC-TC-1011 (1999)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xiao, Y., Urban, S.D.: Using Data Dependencies to Support the Recovery of Concurrent Processes in a Service Composition Environment. In: Proc. of Coop. Inf. Syst. Monterrey, Mexico (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nick R. T. P. van Beest
    • 1
  • Pavel Bulanov
    • 2
  • Hans Wortmann
    • 1
  • Alexander Lazovik
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Business & ICT, Faculty of Economics and BusinessUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Johann Bernoulli Institute for Mathematics and Computer Science, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural SciencesUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations