Advertisement

Looking into the Future

Using Timed Automata to Provide a Priori Advice about Timed Declarative Process Models
  • Michael Westergaard
  • Fabrizio Maria Maggi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7565)

Abstract

Many processes are characterized by high variability, making traditional process modeling languages cumbersome or even impossible to be used for their description. This is especially true in cooperative environments relying heavily on human knowledge. Declarative languages, like Declare, alleviate this issue by not describing what to do step by step but by defining a set of constraints between actions that must not be violated during the process execution. Furthermore, in modern cooperative business, time is of utmost importance. Therefore, declarative process models should be able to take this dimension into consideration. Timed Declare has already previously been introduced to monitor temporal constraints at runtime, but it has until now only been possible to provide an alert when a constraint has already been violated without the possibility of foreseeing and avoiding such violations. Moreover, the existing definitions of Timed Declare do not support the static detection of time-wise inconsistencies. In this paper, we introduce an extended version of Timed Declare with a formal timed semantics for the entire language. The semantics degenerates to the untimed semantics in the expected way. We also introduce a translation to timed automata, which allows us to detect inconsistencies in models prior to execution and to early detect that a certain task is time sensitive. This means that either the task cannot be executed after a deadline (or before a latency), or that constraints are violated unless it is executed before (or after) a certain time. This makes it possible to use declarative process models to provide a priori guidance instead of just a posteriori detecting that an execution is invalid.

Keywords

declarative process modeling metric temporal logic error detection operational support timed automata Declare 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Computer Science - Research and Development 23, 99–113 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., Dill, D.: A Theory of Timed Automata. Theoretical Computer Science 126(2), 183–235 (1994)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.: Real-time logics: complexity and expressiveness. In: Proceedings of Fifth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, LICS 1990, pp. 390–401 (June 1990)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bauer, A., Leucker, M., Schallhart, C.: Comparing ltl semantics for runtime verification. Logic and Computation, 651–674 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    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
  6. 6.
    David, D.: Timing Assumptions and Verification of Finite-state Concurrent Systems. In: Sifakis, J. (ed.) CAV 1989. LNCS, vol. 407, pp. 197–212. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koymans, R.: Specifying real-time properties with metric temporal logic. Real-Time Systems 2, 255–299 (1990), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01995674, 10.1007/BF01995674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Montali, M.: Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models. LNBIP, vol. 56, pp. 1–383. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pesic, M.: Constraint-Based Workflow Management Systems: Shifting Controls to Users. Ph.D. thesis, Beta Research School for Operations Management and Logistics, Eindhoven (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Declare: Full support for loosely-structured processes. In: IEEE International EDOC Conference 2007, pp. 287–300 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thati, P., Roşu, G.: Monitoring algorithms for metric temporal logic specifications. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 113, 145–162 (2005), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2004.01.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    UppAal webpage, http://www.uppaal.org
  13. 13.
    Westergaard, M., Maggi, F.: Declare: A Tool Suite for Declarative Workflow Modeling and Enactment. In: Ludwig, H., Reijers, H. (eds.) Business Process Management Demonstration Track (BPMDemos 2011). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 820. CEUR-WS.org (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Westergaard
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Maria Maggi
    • 1
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations