Equivalence Transformations for the Design of Interorganizational Data-Flow

  • Julius Köpke
  • Johann EderEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9097)


Distributed interorganizational processes can be designed by first creating a global process, which is then split into processes or views for each participant. Existing methods for automating this transformation concentrate on the control flow and neglect either the data flow or address it only partially. Even for small interorganizational processes, there is a considerably large number of potential realizations of the data flow. We analyze the problem of generating message exchanges to realize the dataflow in depth and present a solution for constructing data flows which are optimal with respect to some design objectives. The approach is based on a definition of the correctness of data flow and a complete set of transformations which preserve correctness and allow to search for an optimal solution from a generated correct solution.


Business Process Global Process Message Exchange Equivalence Transformation Business Process Management 
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.
    Combi, C., Gambini, M.: Flaws in the flow: the weakness of unstructured business process modeling languages dealing with data. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2009, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5870, pp. 42–59. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Decker, G., Weske, M.: Interaction-centric modeling of process choreographies. Inform. Syst. 36(2), 292–312 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eder, J., Kerschbaumer, N., Köpke, J., Pichler, H., Tahamtan, A.: View-based interorganizational workflows. CompSysTech 2011, pp 1–10. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eder, J., Tahamtan, A.: Temporal consistency of view based interorganizational workflows. In: Kaschek, R., Kop, C., Steinberger, C., Fliedl, G. (eds.) Information Systems and E-business Technologies. LNBIP, vol. 5, pp. 96–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fdhila, W., Dumas, M., Godart, C.: Optimized decentralization of composite web services. In: CollaborateCom 2010, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fdhila, W., Godart, C.: Toward synchronization between decentralized orchestrations of composite web services. In: CollaborateCom 2009, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fdhila, W., Yildiz, U., Godart, C.: A flexible approach for automatic process decentralization using dependency tables. In: ICWS 2009, pp. 847–855 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goettelmann, E., Fdhila, W., Godart, C.: Partitioning and cloud deployment of composite web services under security constraints. In: IC2E 2013, pp. 193–200. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hollingsworth, D.: The workflow reference model (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khalaf, R., Leymann, F.: Role-based decomposition of business processes using bpel. In: ICWS 2006, pp. 770–780 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khalaf, R., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Maintaining data dependencies across BPEL process fragments. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 207–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khalaf, R., Leymann, F.: Coordination for fragmented loops and scopes in a distributed business process. Inform. Syst. 37(6), 593–610 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Köpke, J., Eder, J.: Equivalence Transformations on Interorganizational Processes to Shift Communication Steps Technical report, AAU Klagenfurt (2014).
  14. 14.
    Köpke, J., Eder, J., Künstner, M.: Projections of abstract interorganizational business processes. In: Decker, H., Lhotská, L., Link, S., Spies, M., Wagner, R.R. (eds.) DEXA 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8645, pp. 472–479. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Köpke, J., Eder, J., Künstner, M.: Top-down design of collaborating processes. In: iiWAS 2014. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meyer, A., Pufahl, L., Batoulis, K., Kruse, S., Lindhauer, T., Stoff, T., Fahland, D., Weske, M.: Automating data exchange in process choreographies. In: Jarke, M., Mylopoulos, J., Quix, C., Rolland, C., Manolopoulos, Y., Mouratidis, H., Horkoff, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8484, pp. 316–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Monsieur, G., Snoeck, M., Lemahieu, W.: Managing data dependencies in service compositions. J. Syst. Software 85(11), 2604–2628 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nanda, M.G., Chandra, S., Sarkar, V.: Decentralizing execution of composite web services. In: Proc. 19th Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA 2004, pp. 170–187. ACM press (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    OASIS. OASIS Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WSBPEL) TC. Technical report, “OASIS” (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Object Management Group (OMG). Business process model and notation (bpmn) version 2.0. Technical report (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow data patterns: identification, representation and tool support. In: Delcambre, L.M.L., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Mylopoulos, J., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) ER 2005. LNCS, vol. 3716, pp. 353–368. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sun, S.X., Zhao, J.L., Nunamaker, J.F., Sheng, O.R.L.: Formulating the data-flow perspective for business process management. Information Systems Research 17(4), 374–391 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Trčka, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Sidorova, N.: Data-flow anti-patterns: discovering data-flow errors in workflows. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 425–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of workflow nets. In: Azéma, Pierre, Balbo, Gianfranco (eds.) ICATPN 1997. LNCS, vol. 1248. Springer, Heidelberg (1997) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Inheritance of interorganizational workflows: How to agree to disagree without loosing control? IT and Management 4(4), 345–389 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Lohmann, N., Massuthe, P., Stahl, C., Wolf, K.: Multiparty contracts: Agreeing and implementing interorganizational processes. Comput. J. 53(1), 90–106 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distrib. Parallel Databases 14(1), 5–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M.: The P2P approach to interorganizational workflows. In: Dittrich, K.R., Geppert, A., Norrie, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2068, pp. 140–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yildiz, U., Godart, C.: Information flow control with decentralized service compositions. ICWS 2007, 9–17 (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhai, Y., Hongyi, S., Zhan, S.: A data flow optimization based approach for BPEL processes partition. In: ICEBE 2007, pp. 410–413 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Informatics-SystemsAlpen-Adria UniversitätKlagenfurtAustria

Personalised recommendations