Compiling Process Graphs into Executable Code

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3286)


Model-driven architecture envisions a paradigm shift as dramatic as the one from low-level assembler languages to high-level programming languages. In order for this vision to become reality, algorithms are needed that compile models of software systems into deployable and executable implementations. This paper discusses two algorithms that provide such transformations for process graph models in a business process or workflow environment and produce executable programs based on Web services and orchestration languages. The reverse transformations back from executable programs to process graphs are also described.


Business Process Graph Transformation Activity Diagram Outgoing Edge Business Process Model 
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.
    OMG: Model-Driven Architecture (MDA),
  2. 2.
    Uhl, A.: Model Driven Architecture Is Ready for Prime Time. IEEE Software 20(5), 70–73 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ambler, S.: Agile Model Driven Development Is Good Enough. IEEE Software 20(5), 71–73 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W3C: Web Services Activity,
  5. 5.
    OASIS: Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS) 1.1 (May 5, 2003),
  6. 6.
    W3C: Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1. March 15 (2001),
  7. 7.
    OMG: Unified Modeling Language 2.0,
  8. 8.
    BPMI: BPMN 1.0 working draft,
  9. 9.
    White, S.: Process Modeling Notations and Workflow Patterns. In: Fischer, L. (ed.) The Workflow Handbook 2004, Future Strategies Inc., Lighthouse Point (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aho, A., et al.: Compilers. In: Principles, Techniques, and Tools, Addison-Wesley, Reading (1986)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Classification of Model Transformation Approaches. Report of 2nd OOPSLA Workshop on Generative Techniques in the context of Model Driven Architecture, Anaheim, California (October 2003),
  12. 12.
    Karsai, G., Agrawal, A.: Graph Transformations in OMG’s Model-Driven Architecture. In: Proc. Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance, Charlotsville, Virginia (September 2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heckel, R., et al.: Towards Automatic Translation of UML Models into Semantic Domains. In: Proc. APPLIGRAPH Workshop on Application of Graph Transformation (AGT 2002), Grenoble, France, pp. 11–22 (April 2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wess, B.: Optimizing Signal Flow Graph Compilers for Digital Signal Processors. In: Proc. 5th International Conference on Signal Processing Applications and Technology, Dallas, Texas (October 1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Koehler, J., Hauser, R.: Untangling Unstructured Cyclic Flows - A Solution based on Continuations (2004) (submitted for publication)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ammarguellat, Z.: A Control-Flow Normalization Algorithm and Its Complexity. Software Engineering 18(3), 237–251 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hecht, M.S., Ullman, J.D.: Flow Graph Reducibility. SIAM J. Comput. 1(2), 188–202 (1972)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gardner, T., et al.: A Review of OMG MOF 2.0 Query / Views / Ttransformations Submissions and Recommendations Towards the Final Standard. In: Workshop on MetaModelling for MDA, York, England (November 2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    OMG: Meta Object Facility 2.0,
  20. 20.
    Warmer, J., Kleppe, A.: The Object Constraint Language – Second Edition. In: Getting Your Models Ready for MDA, Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rumpe, B.: Executable Modeling with UML. A Vision or a Nightmare? In: Issues & Trends of Information Technology Management in Contemporary Associations, Seattle, pp. 697–701. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IBM Zurich Research LaboratoryRüschlikonSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations