Advertisement

A Rigorous Semantics for BPMN 2.0 Process Diagrams

  • Felix Kossak
  • Christa Illibauer
  • Verena Geist
  • Jan Kubovy
  • Christine Natschläger
  • Thomas Ziebermayr
  • Theodorich Kopetzky
  • Bernhard Freudenthaler
  • Klaus-Dieter Schewe
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter we present an Abstract State Machine (ASM) ground model designed to rigorously specify the semantics of Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Process Diagrams, based on the BPMN 2.0 standard [95]. However, we deviate from the standard in several points, having identified several inconsistencies as well as ambiguities there. Moreover, we are not convinced that every construct in the standard is really helpful. We discuss these issues in detail.

Keywords

Process Instance Abstract Rule Correlation Information Sequence Flow Abstract State Machine 
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.

References

  1. 2.
    van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A.: Workflow patterns homepage. http://www.workflowpatterns.com. Accessed 2012-09-01. (2011)
  2. 6.
    Allweyer, T.: BPMN 2.0 - Business Process Model and Notation: Einführung in den Standard für die Geschäftsprozessmodellierung. Books on Demand (2009), http://books.google.at/books?id=GjmLqXNYFS4C
  3. 20.
    Börger, E., Sörensen, O.: BPMN core modeling concepts: Inheritance-based execution semantics. In: Embley, D.W., Thalheim, B. (eds.) Handbook of Conceptual Modeling: Theory, Practice and Research Challenges, pp. 287–335. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 21.
    Börger, E., Sörensen, O., Thalheim, B.: On defining the behavior of OR-joins in business process models. Journal of Universal Computer Science pp. 3–32 (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 23.
    Börger, E., Thalheim, B.: A method for verifiable and validatable business process modeling. In: Börger, E., Cisternino, A. (eds.) Advances in Software Engineering, vol. 5316, chap. A Method for Verifiable and Validatable Business Process Modeling, pp. 59–115. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2008), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89762-0_3
  6. 30.
    Decker, G., Mendling, J.: Process instatiation. Data & Knowledge Engineering 68(9), 777–792 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 47.
    Freund, J., Rücker, B., Henninger, T.: Praxishandbuch BPMN: Incl. BPMN 2.0. Hanser, München (2010), http://books.google.at/books?id=04YycAAACAAJ
  8. 57.
    van Hee, K., Oanea, O., Serebrenik, A., Sidorova, N., Voorhoeve, M.: History-based joins: Semantics, soundness and implementation. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J., Sheth, A. (eds.) Business Process Management, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 225–240. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 58.
    ter Hofstede, A.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Adamns, M., Russell, N. (eds.): Modern Business Process Automation: YAWL and its Support Environment. Springer, Heidelberg (2010), http://www.springer.com/computer+science/database+management+%26+information+retrieval/book/978-3-642-03120-5
  10. 63.
    Kindler, E.: On the semantics of epcs: A framework for resolving the vicious circle. In: Desel, J., Pernici, B., Weske, M. (eds.) Business Process Management, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3080, pp. 82–97. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2004), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-25970-1_6
  11. 66.
    Kossak, F., Illibauer, C., Geist, V.: Event-based gateways: Open questions and inconsistencies. In: Mendling, J., Weidlich, M. (eds.) BPMN. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 125, pp. 53–67. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 86.
    Natschläger, C.: Towards a BPMN 2.0 ontology. In: Dijkman, R., Hofstetter, J., Koehler, J. (eds.) Business Process Model and Notation, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 95, pp. 1–15. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 87.
    Natschläger, C., Geist, V.: A layered approach for actor modelling in business processes. Business Process Management Journal 19, 917–932 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 94.
    OASIS: Web Services Transaction (WS-TX) TC., https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ws-tx. Accessed 2014-02-03.
  15. 95.
    Object Management Group: Business process model and notation (BPMN) 2.0. http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0. Accessed 2011-08-02. (2011)
  16. 108.
    Recker, J.C.: Opportunities and constraints: the current struggle with BPMN. Business Process Management Journal 16(1), 181–201 (2010), http://eprints.qut.edu.au/20316/
  17. 128.
    Silver, B.: BPMN Method and Style. Cody-Cassidy Press (2009), http://books.google.at/books?id=v7VXPgAACAAJ
  18. 129.
    Sörensen, O.: Semantics of Joins in cyclic BPMN Workflows. Master’s thesis, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 142.
    White, S., Miers, D.: BPMN Modeling and Reference Guide: Understanding and Using BPMN. Future Strategies Incorporated (2008), http://books.google.at/books?id=0Z2Td3bCYW8C
  20. 143.
    White, S.: Oral answers to problems and questions posed at the BPMN’12 conference (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 152.
    Wynn, M.T.: Semantics, verification, and implementation of workflows with cancellation regions and OR-joins. Ph.D. thesis, Queensland University of Technology (2006), http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16324/
  22. 153.
    Wynn, M., Aalst, W., Hofstede, A., Edmond, D.: Verifying workflows with cancellation regions and or-joins: An approach based on reset nets and reachability analysis. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J., Sheth, A. (eds.) Business Process Management, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 389–394. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2006), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11841760_28

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Felix Kossak
    • 1
  • Christa Illibauer
    • 1
  • Verena Geist
    • 1
  • Jan Kubovy
    • 2
  • Christine Natschläger
    • 1
  • Thomas Ziebermayr
    • 1
  • Theodorich Kopetzky
    • 1
  • Bernhard Freudenthaler
    • 1
  • Klaus-Dieter Schewe
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Competence Center HagenbergHagenberg im MühlkreisAustria
  2. 2.Johannes Kepler University LinzLinzAustria

Personalised recommendations