Checking Business Process Correctness in Apromore

  • Fabrizio FornariEmail author
  • Marcello La Rosa
  • Andrea Polini
  • Barbara Re
  • Francesco Tiezzi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 317)


In this paper we present the integration of BProVe - Business Process Verifier - into the Apromore open-source process analytics platform. Given a BPMN model BProVe enables the verification of properties such as soundness and safeness. Differently from established techniques for BPMN verification, that rely on the availability of a mapping into a transition based formalism (e.g. Petri Nets), BProVe takes advantage of a direct formalisation of the BPMN semantics in terms of Structural Operational Semantics rules. On the one side, this still permits to give precise meaning to BPMN models, otherwise impossible due to the usage of natural language in the BPMN standard specification. On the other side, it permits to overcome some issues related to the mapping of BPMN to other formal languages equipped with their own semantics (e.g. non local effects of BPMN elements such as termination). The defined BPMN semantics has been implemented in MAUDE. Through the MAUDE Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) model checker, correctness properties encoded in LTL formulae are evaluated and the result is then presented to the user. The integration into Apromore allows model designers to use the Apromore BPMN editor to design models and to interact with BProVe to verify properties of the designed model. The results are shown graphically on top of the process model, so as to highlight behavioural paths that violate the correctness properties. Designers can then easily identify the violation and repair the model accordingly.


  1. 1.
    Breu, R., Dustdar, S., Eder, J., Huemer, C., Kappel, G., Köpke, J., Langer, P., Mangler, J., Mendling, J., Neumann, G., Rinderle-Ma, S., Schulte, S., Sobernig, S., Weber, B., Towards living inter-organizational processes. In: 15th IEEE Conference on Business Informatics, pp. 363–366 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clavel, M., Durn, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Mart-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: All About Maude-A High-Performance Logical Framework: How to Specify, Program and Verify Systems in Rewriting Logic. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clavel, M., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Meseguer, J.: Principles of maude. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 4, 65–89 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Corradini, F., Ferrari, A., Fornari, F., Gnesi, S., Polini, A., Re, B., Spagnolo, G.O.: A guidelines framework for understandable BPMN models. Data Knowl. Eng. 113, 129–154 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corradini, F., Fornari, F., Polini, A., Re, B., Tiezzi, F., Vandin, A.: BProVe: a formal verification framework for business process models. In: Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2017, pp. 217–228. IEEE Press (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corradini, F., Fornari, F., Polini, A., Re, B., Tiezzi, F., Vandin, A.: BProVe: tool support for business process verification. In: Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2017, pp. 937–942. IEEE Press (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Corradini, F., Muzi, C., Re, B., Rossi, L., Tiezzi, F.: Global vs. local semantics of BPMN 2.0 OR-join. In: Tjoa, A.M., Bellatreche, L., Biffl, S., van Leeuwen, J., Wiedermann, J. (eds.) SOFSEM 2018. LNCS, vol. 10706, pp. 321–336. Springer, Cham (2018). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Corradini, F., Polini, A., Re, B., Tiezzi, F.: An operational semantics of BPMN collaboration. In: Braga, C., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FACS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9539, pp. 161–180. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2018). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eker, S., Meseguer, J., Sridharanarayanan, A.: The maude LTL model checker. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 71, 162–187 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    La Rosa, M., Reijers, H.A., Van Der Aalst, W.M.P., Dijkman, R.M., Mendling, J., Dumas, M., GarcA-Bauelos, L.: APROMORE: an advanced process model repository. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(6), 7029–7040 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meseguer, J.: Conditional rewriting logic as a unified model of concurrency. Theor. Comput. Sci. 96(1), 73–155 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morimoto, S.: A survey of formal verification for business process modeling. In: Bubak, M., van Albada, G.D., Dongarra, J., Sloot, P.M.A. (eds.) ICCS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5102, pp. 514–522. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  14. 14.
    zur Muehlen, M., Recker, J.: How Much Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical Use of the Business Process Modeling Notation. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 465–479. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  15. 15.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN V 2.0) (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Plotkin, G.D.: A structural approach to operational semantics. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 60(61), 17–139 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Structural characterizations of sound workflow nets. Comput. Sci. Rep. 96(23), 18–22 (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wynn, M.T., Verbeek, H.M.W., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D.: Business process verification-finally a reality!. Bus. Process Manag. J. 15(1), 74–92 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabrizio Fornari
    • 1
    Email author
  • Marcello La Rosa
    • 2
  • Andrea Polini
    • 1
  • Barbara Re
    • 1
  • Francesco Tiezzi
    • 1
  1. 1.Univeristy of CamerinoCamerinoItaly
  2. 2.University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations