Pattern-Based Modeling and Formalizing of Business Process Quality Constraints

  • Lial Khaluf
  • Christian Gerth
  • Gregor Engels
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6741)

Abstract

The quality of business processes can be checked by verifying their compliance with specific quality constraints. These constraints represent a set of required temporal and logical relationships between different steps of business processes. Quality constraints are usually formulated as informal texts, which makes them difficult to be verified, when business processes become complex. One way to solve this problem is by automating the verification of quality constraints on business processes by applying model checking. To apply model checking, both business processes and quality constraints have to be formalized. In this paper, we define a new visual language for modeling quality constraints and we provide a pattern-based translation for quality constraint models into Computation Tree Logic formulas.

Keywords

business process quality constraint visual pattern CTL-formula 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ISO 9001:2000:Quality Management Systems - Requirements. ISO International Organization for Standardization (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Förster, A., Engels, G., Schattkowsky, T., Van Der Straeten, R.: Verification of Business Process Quality Constraints Based on Visual Process Patterns. In: The First Joint IEEE/IFIP Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering (TASE 2007), pp. 197–208. IEEE Computer Society, Shanghai (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Object Management Group:UML 2.0 Superstructure. Version 2.0 (2005), http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.0/Superstructure/PDF/ (last visited 2.12.2010)
  4. 4.
    Förster, A., Engels, G., Schattkowsky, T.: Activity Diagram Patterns for Modeling Quality Constraints in Business Processes. In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 2–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS 1977), pp. 46–57 (1977)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Emerson, E.A.: Temporal and Modal Logic. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B, pp. 955–1072. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu, Y., Müller, S., Xu, K.: A Static Compliance-Checking Framework for Business Process Models. IBM Systems Journal 46, 335–361 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a Truly Declarative Service Flow Language. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Tennenholtz, M. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: DECLARE: Full Support for Loosely-Structured Processes. In: 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2007), Annapolis, Maryland, USA, pp. 287–300 (October 2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pesic, M.: Constraint-Based Workflow Management Systems: Shifting Control to Users. Dissertation. TU Eindhoven (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Awad, A.:BPMN-Q: A Language to Query Business Processes. In: EMISA 2007. LNI, vol. P-119, pp.115-128. GI (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Awad, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Efficient Compliance Checking Using BPMN-Q and Temporal Logic. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 326–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Laroussinie, F., Schnoebelen, P.: A Hierarchy of Temporal Logics with Past. Theoretical Computer Science 148, 303–324 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zuck, L.: Past Temporal Logic. PhD thesis. Weizmann Intitute, Rehovet, Israel (1986)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Information and Software Technology 50, 1281–1294 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wörzberger, R., Kurpick, T., Heer, T.: Checking Correctness and Compliance of Integrated Process Models. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing (SYNASC 2008), pp. 576–583. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Object Management Group: Object Constraint Language (OCL) Specification - Version 2.0 (May 2006), http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/2006-05-01 (last visited 2.12.2010)
  18. 18.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P.: Design and Verification of Instantiable Compliance Rule Graphs in Process-Aware Information Systems. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) CAiSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 9–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hodges, W.: Classical Logic I: First Order Logic. In: Goble, L. (ed.) The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic. Blackwell, Malden (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghose, A.K., Koliadis, G.: Auditing Business Process Compliance. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khaluf, L.: Business Process Quality Assurance. Master thesis. University of Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany (May 2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lial Khaluf
    • 1
  • Christian Gerth
    • 1
  • Gregor Engels
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of PaderbornPaderbornGermany

Personalised recommendations