Behavioral Reasoning on Semantic Business Processes in a Rule-Based Framework

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 449)


We propose a representation method for semantically enriched business processes by combining in a uniform logical framework both the procedural and the domain dependent knowledge. First, we define a rule-based procedural semantics for a relevant fragment of BPMN, a very popular graphical notation for specifying business processes. Our semantics defines a state transition system by following an approach similar to the Fluent Calculus, and allows us to specify state change in terms of preconditions and effects of the enactment of activities. Then, we show how the procedural process knowledge can be seamlessly integrated with the domain knowledge specified by using the OWL-RL rule-based ontology language. As a result, our framework provides a wide range of reasoning services by using standard logic programming inference engines.


Business processes Ontologies Rule-based reasoning Verification 


  1. 1.
    Battle, S., et al.: Semantic Web Services Ontology (2005).
  2. 2.
    Burstein, M., et al.: OWL-S: Semantic markup for web services. W3C Member Submission (2004).
  3. 3.
    Chen, W., Warren, D.S.: Tabled evaluation with delaying for general logic programs. JACM 43, 20–74 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50, 1281–1294 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fensel, D., et al.: Enabling Semantic Web Services: The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fu, X., Bultan, T., Su, J.: Analysis of interacting BPEL web services. In: International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 621–630. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hepp, M., et al.: Semantic business process management: a vision towards using semantic web services for business process management. In: International Conference on e-Business Engineering, IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hitzler, P., Krötzsch, M., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Rudolph, S.: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. W3C Recommendation (2009).
  10. 10.
    Kindler, E.: On the semantics of EPCs: Resolving the vicious circle. Data Knowl. Eng. 56(1), 23–40 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lin, Y.: Semantic annotation for process models: Facilitating process knowledge management via semantic interoperability. Ph.D. Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, Y., Müller, S., Xu, K.: A static compliance-checking framework for business process models. IBM Syst. J. 46, 335–361 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming. Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New York (1987)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Montali, M., Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Storari, S.: Declarative specification and verification of service choreographies. ACM Trans. Web 4(1), 3:1–3:61 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Narayanan, S., McIlraith, S.: Analysis and simulation of web services. Comp. Netw. 42, 675–693 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nilsson, U., Lübcke, J.: Constraint logic programming for local and symbolic model-checking. In: Palamidessi, C., Moniz Pereira, L., Lloyd, J.W., Dahl, V., Furbach, U., Kerber, M., Lau, K.-K., Sagiv, Y., Stuckey, P.J. (eds.) CL 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1861, pp. 384–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (2011).
  18. 18.
    Przymusinski, T.C.: On the declarative semantics of deductive databases and logic programs. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, San Francisco (1988)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roman, D., Kifer, M.: Semantic web service choreography: contracting and enactment. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 550–566. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smith, F., Missikoff, M., Proietti, M.: Ontology-based querying of composite services. In: Ardagna, C.A., Damiani, E., Maciaszek, L.A., Missikoff, M., Parkin, M. (eds.) BSME 2010. LNCS, vol. 7350, pp. 159–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sohrabi, S., Prokoshyna, N., McIlraith, S.A.: Web service composition via the customization of golog programs with user preferences. In: Borgida, A.T., Chaudhri, V.K., Giorgini, P., Yu, E.S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5600, pp. 319–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thielscher, M.: Introduction to the fluent calculus. Electron. Trans. Artif. Intell. 2, 179–192 (1998)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of Petri nets to workflow management. J. Circ. Syst. Comput. 8(1), 21–66 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Völzer, H.: A new semantics for the inclusive converging gateway in safe processes. In: Hull, R., Mendling, J., Tai, S. (eds.) BPM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6336, pp. 294–309. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weber, I., Hoffmann, J., Mendling, J.: Beyond soundness: on the verification of semantic business process models. Distrib. Parallel Dat. 27, 271–343 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research Council, IASI “Antonio Ruberti”RomaItaly

Personalised recommendations