Advertisement

An Artifact-Centric Approach to Dynamic Modification of Workflow Execution

  • Wei Xu
  • Jianwen Su
  • Zhimin Yan
  • Jian Yang
  • Liang Zhang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7044)

Abstract

Being able to quickly respond to change is critical to any organizations to stay competitive in the marketplace. It is widely acknowledged that it is a necessity to provide flexibility in the process model to handle changes at both model level as well as instance level. Motivated by a business policy rich and highly dynamic business process in the real estate administration in China, we develop a dynamically modifiable workflow model. The model is based on the artifact-centric design principle as opposed to the traditional process-centric approach. Runtime execution variations can be specified as execution modification rules, which lead to deviations to the normal executions. With the support of rules and declarative constructs such as retract, skip, add, and replace, ad-hoc changes can be applied to execution at anytime depending on the runtime data and the instance status gathered through the use of artifacts in our model.

Keywords

Business Process Manage Business Process Execution Path Business Process Modeling Dynamic Schema 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  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.
    Athena, P.: Flower user manual. Technical report, Pallas Athena BV, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balko, S., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Barros, A.P., La Rosa, M.: Controlled flexibility and lifecycle management of business processes through extensibility. In: EMISA 2009, pp. 97–110 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable worflow models. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 17(2), 177–221 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing business process variants in the process lifecycle. In: Proc. ICEIS (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hull, R., Damaggio, E., Fournier, F., Gupta, M., Heath III, F., Hobson, S., Linehan, M., Maradugu, S., Nigam, A., Sukaviriya, P., Vaculín, R.: Introducing the guard-stagemilestone approach to specifying business entity lifecycles. In: Proc. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods (WS-FM). Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kucukoguz, E., Su, J.: On lifecycle constraints of artifact-centric workflows. In: Proc. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods, WSFM (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu, G., Liu, X., Qin, H., Su, J., Yan, Z., Zhang, L.: Automated realization of business workflow specification. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on SOA, Globalization, People, and Work (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts:an approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3) (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Declare: Full support for looselystructured processes. In: EDOC 2007, pp. 287–300 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, M.H., Sidorova, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Constraint-Based Workflow Models: Change Made Easy. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 77–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Redding, G., Dumas, M.: A flexible object-centric approach for business process modeling. SOCA 4, 191–201 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Adeptflex-supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 10(2), 93–129 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rinderle, S.B., Reichert, M.U., Dadam, P.: Correctness criteria for dynamic changes in workflow systems – a survey. Data & Knowledge Engineering 50(1), 9–34 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schonenberg, H., Mans, R., Russell, N., Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process flexibility: A survey of contemporary approaches. In: CIAO! / EOMAS 2008, pp. 16–30 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schonenberg, H., Weber, B., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Supporting flexible processes through recommendations based on history. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 51–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: Decserflow: towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: International Conference on Web Service and Formal Methods (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. CSRD 23, 99–113 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Change patterns and change support features enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 66(3), 438–466 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weber, B., Sadiq, S.W., Reichert, M.: Beyond rigidity - dynamic process lifecycle support. Computer Science - R&D 23(2), 47–65 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wei Xu
    • 1
  • Jianwen Su
    • 2
  • Zhimin Yan
    • 1
    • 4
  • Jian Yang
    • 3
  • Liang Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceFudan UniversityChina
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUC Santa BarbaraUSA
  3. 3.Department of ComputingMaquaire UniversityAustralia
  4. 4.Real Estate Information CenterHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations