Advertisement

Dealing with Variability: A Control-Based Configuration of Process Variants

  • Sauro SchaidtEmail author
  • Eduardo Alves Portela Santos
  • Agnelo Denis Vieira
  • Eduardo de Freitas Rocha Loures
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 569)

Abstract

Process models are often reused in different contexts, resulting in a large number of related process model variants. Such process variants pursue the same or similar business objective, but may differ in their logic (i.e., process logic) due to varying application context at either design time or run-time. We propose a control approach to support the selection and configuration of process variants. Our approach is based on supervisory control theory, which is a formal way to build supervisors for discrete-event systems. In our approach, the supervisors will control the selection and configuration of process variants, based on constraints of certain context. We divide our approach in two main parts: (1) a supervised questionnaire to support configuration and selection of a process variant, and (2) a formal procedure to linking the questionnaire to a process variant from a reference process model.

Keywords

Flexibility Variability Process variants Supervisory control theory 

References

  1. 1.
    Reichert, M.U., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems: Challenges, Methods, Technologies. Springer, Heildelberg (2012)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Configuration and management of process variants. In: Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1. International Handbooks on Information Systems, pp. 237–255. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Issues in modeling process variants with provop. In: Ardagna, D., Mecella, M., Yang, J. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNBIP, vol. 17, pp. 56–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-00328-8_6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lu, R., Sadiq, S., Governatori, G., Yang, X.: Defining adaptation constraints for business process variants. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2009. LNBIP, vol. 21, pp. 145–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-01190-0_13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Capturing variability in business process models: the provop approach. J. Soft. Maint. Evol. Res. Pract. 22(6–7), 519–546 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing process variants in the process lifecycle. In: 10th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 154–161 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Context-based configuration of process variants. In: 3rd International Workshop on Technologies for Context-Aware Business Process Management, pp. 31–40 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    La Rosa, M., Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-based variability modeling for system configuration. Soft. Syst. Model 8(2), 251–274 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    der Aalst, W.M.P., Dreiling, A., Gottschalk, F., Rosemann, M., Jansen-Vullers, M.H.: Configurable process models as a basis for reference modeling. In: Bussler, C.J., Haller, A. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3812, pp. 512–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11678564_47 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aalst, W.M., Basten, T.: Inheritance of workflows: an approach to tackling problems related to change. Theoret. Comp. Sci. 270(1), 125–203 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Ter Hofstede, A.H., Mendling, J.: Configurable multi-perspective business process models. Info. Sys. 36(2), 313–340 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A.H.: Modelling business process variability for design-time configuration. In: Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling, pp. 204–228 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramadge, P.J.G., Wonham, W.M.: The control of discrete event systems. Proc. IEEE 77(1), 81–98 (1989)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ramadge, P.J.G., Wonham, W.M.: Supervisory control of a class of discrete event processes. SIAM J. Control Optim. 25(1), 206–230 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Santos, E.A.P., Vieira, A.D., Schaidt, S., Loures, E.F.R.: Modeling constraint-based processes: a supervisory control theory application. ComSIS 11(4), 1229–1247 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ayora, C., Torres, V., Reichert, M., Weber, B., Pelechano, V.: Towards run-time flexibility for process families: open issues and research challenges. In: Rosa, M., Soffer, P. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNBIP, vol. 132, pp. 477–488. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-36285-9_49 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schaidt, S., Freitas Rocha Loures, E., Vieira, A.D., Santos, E.A.P.: Supervision of constraint-based processes: a declarative perspective. In: Demey, Y.T., Panetto, H. (eds.) OTM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8186, pp. 134–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-41033-8_20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Santos, E.A.P., Francisco, R., Vieira, A.D., F.R. Loures, E., Busetti, M.A.: Modeling business rules for supervisory control of process-aware information systems. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 100, pp. 447–458. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-28115-0_42 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cassandras, C.G., Lafortune, S.: Introduction to Discrete Event Systems. Springer, New York (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schobbens, P.Y., Heymans, P., Trigaux, J.C.: Feature diagrams: a survey and a formal semantics. In: Requirements Engineering, pp. 136–145. IEEE Computer Society (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Batory, D.: Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. In: Obbink, H., Pohl, K. (eds.) SPLC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3714, pp. 7–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi: 10.1007/11554844_3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Santos, E.A., Francisco, R., Pesic, M., Aalst, W.M.: Supervisory control service for supporting flexible processes. Ind. Manag. Data Sys. 113(7), 1007–1024 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sauro Schaidt
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eduardo Alves Portela Santos
    • 1
  • Agnelo Denis Vieira
    • 1
  • Eduardo de Freitas Rocha Loures
    • 1
  1. 1.IAAS GroupPontifícia Universidade Católica do ParanáCuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations