Situation-Aware Execution and Dynamic Adaptation of Traditional Workflow Models

  • Kálmán KépesEmail author
  • Uwe Breitenbücher
  • Santiago Gómez Sáez
  • Jasmin Guth
  • Frank Leymann
  • Matthias Wieland
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9846)


The continuous growth of the Internet of Things together with the complexity of modern information systems results in several challenges for modeling, provisioning, executing, and maintaining systems that are capable of adapting themselves to changing situations in dynamic environments. The properties of the workflow technology, such as its recovery features, makes this technology suitable to be leveraged in such environments. However, the realization of situation-aware mechanisms that dynamically adapt process executions to changing situations is not trivial and error prone, since workflow modelers cannot reflect all possibly occurring situations in complex environments in their workflow models. In this paper, we present a method and concepts to enable modelers to create traditional, situation-independent workflow models that are automatically transformed into situation-aware workflow models that cope with dynamic contextual situations. Our work builds upon the usage of workflow fragments, which are dynamically selected during runtime to cope with prevailing situations retrieved from low-level context sensor data. We validate the practical feasibility of our work by a prototypical implementation of a Situation-aware Workflow Management System (SaWMS) that supports the presented concepts.


Workflow technology Situation-aware workflow execution Workflow adaptation Workflow transformation Workflow fragments 



This work is partially funded by the BMWi German Projects “SePiA.Pro” (01MD16013F) and “SmartOrchestra” (01MD16001F), and the DFG German Project “SitOPT” (610872).


  1. 1.
    Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Worklets: a service-oriented implementation of dynamic flexibility in workflows. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 291–308. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ardissono, L., Furnari, R., Goy, A., Petrone, G., Segnan, M.: Context-aware workflow management. In: Baresi, L., Fraternali, P., Houben, G.-J. (eds.) ICWE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4607, pp. 47–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atzori, L., Iera, A., Morabito, G.: The internet of things: a survey. Comput. Netw. 54(15), 2787–2805 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Breitenbücher, U., Hirmer, P., Képes, K., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Wieland, M.: A situation-aware workflow modelling extension. In: Proceedings of iiWAS 2015, pp. 478–484. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bucchiarone, A., Marconi, A., Pistore, M., Raik, H.: Dynamic adaptation of fragment-based and context-aware business processes. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Web Services (ICWS), pp. 33–41. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fürst, S.: Konzept und Implementierung eines Situation Handlers. Master thesis, University of Stuttgart, IAAS (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gallagher, B.: Matching structure and semantics: a survey on graph-based pattern matching. AAAI FS 6, 45–53 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gómez Sáez, S., Andrikopoulos, V., Hahn, M., Karastoyanova, D., Weiß, A.: Enabling reusable and adaptive modeling, provisioning & execution of BPEL processes. In: Proceedings of SOCA 2015. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    González, L., Ortiz, G.: An event-driven integration platform for context-aware web services. J. UCS 20(8), 1071–1088 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hirmer, P., Wieland, M., Schwarz, H., Mitschang, B., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F.: SitRS - a situation recognition service based on modeling and executing situation templates. In: Proceedings of the 9th Symposium and Summer School On Service-Oriented Computing, pp. 113–127. IBM Research Report (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ibsen, C., Anstey, J.: Camel in Action, 1st edn. Manning Publications Co., Greenwich (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    JGraphT Team: JGraphT - a free Java Graph Library (2016).
  13. 13.
    Képes, K.: Erkennung und dynamische Ersetzung von Fragmenten in Workflow-Modellen. Master thesis, University of Stuttgart, IAAS (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kopp, O., Eberle, H., Leymann, F., Unger, T.: The subprocess spectrum. In: Proceedings of the Business Process and Services Computing Conference (BPSC 2010), vol. P-177, pp. 267–279. Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI) (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leymann, F., Roller, D.: Production Workflow: Concepts and Techniques. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Modafferi, S., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Pernici, B.: A methodology for designing and managing context-aware workflows. In: Krogstie, J., Kautz, K., Allen, D. (eds.) MOBIS’05. IFIP, vol. 191, pp. 91–106. Springer, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mundbrod, N., Grambow, G., Kolb, J., Reichert, M.: Context-aware process injection: enhancing process flexibility by late extension of process instances. In: Debruyne, C., Panetto, H., Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Weichhart, G., An, Y., Ardagna, C.A. (eds.) OTM 2015. LNCS, vol. 9415, pp. 127–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL) Version 2.0. Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0. Object Management Group (OMG) (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pichler, P., Weber, B., Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Imperative versus declarative process modeling languages: an empirical investigation. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2011, Part I. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 383–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schonenberg, H., Mans, R., Russell, N., Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.: Process flexibility: a survey of contemporary approaches. In: Dietz, J.L.G., Albani, A., Barjis, J. (eds.) Advances in Enterprise Engineering I. LNBIP, vol. 10, pp. 16–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schumm, D., Karastoyanova, D., Leymann, F., Strauch, S.: Fragmento: advanced process fragment library. In: Pokorny, J., Repa, V., Richta, K., Wojtkowski, W., Linger, H., Barry, C., Lang, M. (eds.) Information Systems Development, pp. 659–670. Springer, New York (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vukojevic-Haupt, K., Gómez Sáez, S., Haupt, F., Karastoyanova, D., Leymann, F.: A middleware-centric optimization approach for the automated provisioning of services in the cloud. In: Proceedings of CloudCom 2015, pp. 174–179. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wieland, M., Kopp, O., Nicklas, D., Leymann, F.: Towards context-aware workflows. In: CAiSE 2007, pp. 577–591 (2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wieland, M., Schwarz, H., Breitenbücher, U., Leymann, F.: Towards situation-aware adaptive workflows: SitOPT a general purpose situation-aware workflow management system. In: Proceedings of PerCom 2015, pp. 32–37. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kálmán Képes
    • 1
    Email author
  • Uwe Breitenbücher
    • 1
  • Santiago Gómez Sáez
    • 1
  • Jasmin Guth
    • 1
  • Frank Leymann
    • 1
  • Matthias Wieland
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Architecture of Application SystemsUniversity of StuttgartStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Parallel and Distributed SystemsUniversity of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations