Advertisement

Various Notions of Soundness for Decision-Aware Business Processes

  • Kimon Batoulis
  • Stephan Haarmann
  • Mathias Weske
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10650)

Abstract

The Decision Model and Notation (DMN) specification enables process designers to represent the decision logic and requirements of business processes. When integrating DMN models into processes it needs to be assured that the correctness of the process is not impaired. The precise semantics for executing DMN models in the context of a business process permits to broaden existing soundness notions for workflow verification to encompass such decision-aware processes. This paper presents correctness notions for processes referring to DMN conform decision models and groups them in a manner that follows the intuition of the well established soundness notions for workflow nets. In doing so, we also make use of the different possible states the process can be in at the point at which a decision is made.

Keywords

DMN BPMN Soundness Verification 

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of petri nets to workflow management. J. Circuits Syst. Comput. 8(1), 21–66 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of workflow nets. In: Azéma, P., Balbo, G. (eds.) ICATPN 1997. LNCS, vol. 1248, pp. 407–426. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). doi: 10.1007/3-540-63139-9_48 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Batoulis, K., Meyer, A., Bazhenova, E., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Extracting decision logic from process models. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 349–366. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-19069-3_22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Batoulis, K., Weske, M.: Soundness of decision-aware business processes. In: Carmona, J., Engels, G., Kumar, A. (eds.) BPM 2017. LNBIP, vol. 297, pp. 106–124. Springer, Cham (2017). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-65015-9_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Business process model and notation, specification 2.0, version 2 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Calvanese, D., Dumas, M., Laurson, Ü., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Teinemaa, I.: Semantics and analysis of DMN decision tables. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 217–233. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Decision model and notation, specification 1.1, version 1.1 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dehnert, J., Rittgen, P.: Relaxed soundness of business processes. In: Dittrich, K.R., Geppert, A., Norrie, M.C. (eds.) CAiSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2068, pp. 157–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). doi: 10.1007/3-540-45341-5_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., Ouyang, C.: Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50(12), 1281–1294 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Janssens, L., Bazhenova, E., Smedt, J.D., Vanthienen, J., Denecker, M.: Consistent integration of decision (DMN) and process (BPMN) models. In: CAiSE 2016 Forum, pp. 121–128 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kherbouche, O.M., Ahmad, A., Basson, H.: Using model checking to control the structural errors in BPMN models. In: 2013 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), pp. 1–12. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kirk, H.: Use of decision tables in computer programming. Commun. ACM 8(1), 41–43 (1965)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lew, A.: Proof of correctness of decision table programs. Comput. J. 27(3), 230–232 (1984)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martens, A.: On compatibility of web services. Petri Net Newsl. 65(12–20), 100 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martens, A.: Consistency between executable and abstract processes. In: The 2005 IEEE International Conference on 2005 Proceedings e-Technology, e-Commerce and e-Service, pp. 60–67. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.M., ter Hofstede, A.H., Sidorova, N., Verbeek, H., Voorhoeve, M., Wynn, M.T.: Soundness of workflow nets: classification, decidability, and analysis. Formal Aspects Comput. 23(3), 333–363 (2011)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vanthienen, J., Dries, E.: Developments in decision tables: Evolution, applications and a proposed standard. DTEW Research Report (1992)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Von Halle, B., Goldberg, L.: The Decision Model: A Business Logic Framework Linking Business and Technology. Taylor and Francis Group, Abingdon (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer Publishing Company Incorporated, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zaidi, A.K., Levis, A.H.: Validation and verification of decision making rules. Automatica 33(2), 155–169 (1997)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimon Batoulis
    • 1
  • Stephan Haarmann
    • 1
  • Mathias Weske
    • 1
  1. 1.Hasso Plattner InstituteUniversity of PotsdamPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations