On Lifecycle Constraints of Artifact-Centric Workflows

  • Esra Kucukoguz
  • Jianwen Su
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6551)


Data plays a fundamental role in modeling and management of business processes and workflows. Among the recent “data-aware” workflow models, artifact-centric models are particularly interesting. (Business) artifacts are the key data entities that are used in workflows and can reflect both the business logic and the execution states of a running workflow. The notion of artifacts succinctly captures the fluidity aspect of data during workflow executions. However, much of the technical dimension concerning artifacts in workflows is not well understood. In this paper, we study a key concept of an artifact “lifecycle”. In particular, we allow declarative specifications/constraints of artifact lifecycle in the spirit of DecSerFlow, and formulate the notion of lifecycle as the set of all possible paths an artifact can navigate through. We investigate two technical problems: (Compliance) does a given workflow (schema) contain only lifecycle allowed by a constraint? And (automated construction) from a given lifecycle specification (constraint), is it possible to construct a “compliant” workflow? The study is based on a new formal variant of artifact-centric workflow model called “ArtiNets” and two classes of lifecycle constraints named “regular” and “counting” constraints. We present a range of technical results concerning compliance and automated construction, including: (1) compliance is decidable when workflow is atomic or constraints are regular, (2) for each constraint, we can always construct a workflow that satisfies the constraint, and (3) sufficient conditions where atomic workflows can be constructed.


Business Process Regular Language Business Process Management Business Process Model Cardinality Constraint 
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.
    Abiteboul, S., Segoufin, L., Vianu, V.: Modeling and verifying active xml artifacts. Data Engineering Bulletin 32(3), 10–15 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhattacharya, K., Gerede, C.E., 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
  3. 3.
    Chao, T., Cohn, D., Flatgard, A., Hahn, S., Linehan, M.H., Nandi, P., Nigam, A., Pinel, F., Vergo, J., Wu, F.Y.: Artifact-based transformation of ibm global financing. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 261–277. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Verification of choreographies during execution using the reactive event calculus. In: Bruni, R., Wolf, K. (eds.) WS-FM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5387, pp. 55–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    NSF Workshop: Research Challenges on Data-Centric Workflows (May 2009),
  6. 6.
    Deutsch, A., Hull, R., Patrizi, F., Vianu, V.: Automatic verification of data-centric business processes. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT), pp. 252–267 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Emerson, E.A.: Temporal and modal logic. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B ch. 7, pp. 995–1072. North Holland, Amsterdam (1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fritz, C., Hull, R., Su, J.: Automatic construction of simple artifact-based business processes. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Database Theory, ICDT (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gerede, C.E., Bhattacharya, K., Su, J.: Static analysis of business artifact-centric operational models. In: IEEE International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ginsburg, S.: The Mathematical Theory of Context Free Languages. McGraw-Hill, New York (1966)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garey, M., Johnson, D.: Computers and Intractability A Guide to the theory of NP-Completeness. Freeman, New York (1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ginsburg, S., Spanier, E.: Bounded Algol-like languages. Transactions of AMS 113, 333–368 (1964)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gerede, C.E., Su, J.: Specification and verification of artifact behaviors in business process models. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 181–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hopcroft, J.E., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ibarra, O.H.: Reversal-bounded multicounter machines and their decision problems. Journal of the ACM 25, 116–133 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ibarra, O.: Private communications (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Küster, J.M., Ryndina, K.: Improving inconsistency resolution with side-effect evaluation and costs. In: Engels, G., Opdyke, B., Schmidt, D.C., Weil, F. (eds.) MODELS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4735, pp. 136–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Küster, J., Ryndina, K., Gall, H.: Generation of BPM for object life cycle compliance. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 165–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu, G., Liu, X., Qin, H., Su, J., Yan, Z., Zhang, L.: Automated realization of business workflow specification. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on SOA, Globalization, People, and Work (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lü, Y., Qin, H., Li, J., Chen, Y., Zhang, L., Su, J.: Design and implementation of artimt: An artifact-centric Workflow Management System (2010) (manuscript)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Montali, M., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Storari, S.: Towards a decserflow declarative semantics based on computational logic. Technical report, LIA Technical Report 79 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murata, T.: Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE 77(4) (1989)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts: An approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3), 428–445 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Parikh, R.: On context-free languages. Journal of the ACM 13, 570–581 (1966)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Petri, C.A.: Fundamentals of a theory of asynchronous information flow. In: Proc. of IFIP Congress 62, pp. 386–390. North Holland Publ. Comp., Amsterdam (1963)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Peterson, J.L.: Petri Net Theory and the Modeling of Systems. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    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, pp. 92–101, Warszawa (1929)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ryndina, K., Küster, J., Gall, H.: Consistency of business process models and object life cycles. In: Proc. 1st Workshop Quality in Modeling (2006)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Singh, M.: Semantical considerations on workflows: An algebra for intertask dependencies. In: Proc. Workshop on Database Programming Languages, DBPL (1995)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Singh, M.P., Meredith, G., Tomlinson, C., Attie, P.C.: An event algebra for specifying and scheduling workflows. In: Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Database Systems for Advanced Applications, DASFAA (1995)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Business process management demystified: A tutorial on models, systems and standards for workflow management. In: Desel, J., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) Lectures on Concurrency and Petri Nets. LNCS, vol. 3098, pp. 21–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: Specifying and monitoring service flows: Making web services process-aware. In: Test and Analysis of Web Services, pp. 11–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wahler, K., Küster, J.M.: Predicting coupling of object-centric business process implementations. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 148–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Esra Kucukoguz
    • 1
  • Jianwen Su
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations