User- and Data-Driven Processes

  • Manfred Reichert
  • Barbara Weber
Chapter

Abstract

In practice, many business processes are rather unstructured, knowledge-intensive, and driven by user decisions and data. Typically, these processes cannot be straightjacketed into a set of activities with prespecified precedence relations; i.e., the primary driver for the progress of the process is not the event related to activity completion, but the availability of certain values for data objects. When implementing such user- and data-driven processes in a PAIS, a tight integration of processes, data, and users therefore becomes necessary. This chapter presents case handling as an example of such a process support paradigm. Following this, the fundamental characteristics of user- and data-driven processes are elaborated in detail. In particular, it is shown that object-awareness is required; i.e., a PAIS should manage data by means of object types that comprise object attributes and relations to other object types. Picking up this metaphor, pioneering work targeting at a tight integration of processes and data is evaluated. Besides case handling, this includes Proclets, business artifacts, data-driven process coordination, and product-based workflows.

Keywords

Business Process Object Interaction Object Behavior Product Data Model Case Handling 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of workflow nets. In: Application and Theory of Petri Nets 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1248, pp. 407–426. Springer, Berlin (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of Petri nets to workflow management. J. Circuit. Syst. Comp. 8(1), 21–66 (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains. Inform. Software Tech. 41(10), 639–650 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow verification: Finding control-flow errors using Petri-net-based techniques. In: van der Aalst, W., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1806, pp. 161–183. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Exterminating the dynamic change bug: A concrete approach to support worfklow change. Inform. Syst. Front. 3(3), 297–317 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining – Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Barthelmess, P., Ellis, C.A., Wainer, J.: Workflow modeling using proclets. In: Scheuermann, P., Etzion, O. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’00). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1901, pp. 198–209. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Basten, T.: Identifying commonalities and differences in object life cycles using behavorial inheritance. In: Colom, J.M., Koutny, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Application and Theory of Petri Nets (ICATPN’01). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2075, pp. 32–52. Springer, Berlin (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Basten, T.: Inheritance of workflows: An approach to tackling problems related to change. Theor. Comput. Sci. 270(1–2), 125–203 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., de Beer, H.T., van Dongen, B.F.: Process mining and verification of properties: An approach based on temporal logic. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Cooperative Information (CoopIS’05). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3760, pp. 130–147. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Dongen, B.F., Herbst, J., Maruster, L., Schimm, G., Weijters, A.J.M.M.: Workflow mining: A survey of issues and approaches. Data Knowl. Eng. 27(2), 237–267 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., Gottschalk, F., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J.: Preserving correctness during business process model configuration. Formal Asp. Comput. 22(3–4), 459–482 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.: Workflow Management. MIT, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jablonski, S.: Dealing with workflow change: Identification of issues an solutions. Int. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng. 15(5), 267–276 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Lassen, K.B.: Translating unstructured workflow processes to readable BPEL: Theory and implementation. Inform. Software Tech. 50, 131–159 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Lohmann, N., La Rosa, M., Xu, J.: Correctness ensuring process configuration: An approach based on partner synthesis. In: BPM. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6336, pp. 95–111. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Mans, R.S., Russell, N.C.: Workflow support using proclets: Divide, interact and conquer. Bull. IEEE Comput. Soc. Tech. Committ. Data Eng. 32(3), 16–22 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: Decserflow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. Technical report, BPMcenter.org (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Comput. Sci. Res. Dev. 23(2), 99–113 (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Reijers, H.A., Song, M.K.: Discovering social networks from event logs. Comput. Support Cooper. Work 14(6), 549–593 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Rosemann, M., Dumas, M.: Deadline-based escalation in process-aware information systems. Decis. Support Syst. 43, 492–511 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: YAWL: Yet another workflow language. Inform. Syst. 30(4), 245–275 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distr. Parallel Database 14(1), 5–51 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: A new paradigm for business process support. Data Knowl. Eng. 53(2), 129–162 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., et al.: Process mining manifesto. In: Business Process Management Workshops (1), pp. 169–194 (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aamodt, A., Plaza, E.: Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations and system approaches. AI Comm. 7(2), 39–59 (1994)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Abecker, A., Bernardi, A., van Elst, L., Lauer, A., Maus, H., Schwarz, S., Sintek, M.: Frodo: A framework for distributed organizational memories. Milestone 1: Requirements analysis and system architecture. DFKI document, DFKI (2001)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Edmond, D.: Dynamic, extensible and context-aware exception handling for workflows. In: Proceedings of the CoopIS’07. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4803, pp. 95–112. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A service-oriented implementation of dynamic flexibility in workflows. In: Proceedings of the Coopis’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4275, pp. 291–308. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Dynamic and extensible exception handling for workflows: A service-oriented implementation. Technical Report. BPM Center Report BPM-07-03, BPMcenter.org (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Aggarwal, R., Verma, K., Miller, J., Milnor, W.: Constraint driven web service composition in METEOR-S. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2004). 2004 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC 2004), 15–18 September 2004, Shanghai, China. IEEE SCC. IEEE Computer Society, pp. 23–30 (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Aha, D.W., Muñoz-Avila, H.: Introduction: Interactive case-based reasoning. Appl. Intell. 14(1), 7–8 (2001)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Expressing and verifying business contracts with abductive logic programming. In: Boella, G., van der Torre, L.W.N., Verhagen, H. (eds.) Normative Multi-agent Systems. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, vol. 07122. Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum für Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany (2007)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., Machiraju, V.: Web Services – Concepts, Architectures and Applications. Springer, Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Andany, J., Leonard, M., Palisser, C.: Management of schema evolution in databases. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Very Large Databases (VLDB’91), Barcelona, pp. 161–170 (1991)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Awad, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Efficient compliance checking using BPMN-Q and temporal logic. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM’08), pp. 326–341. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Awad, A., Weidlich, M., Weske, M.: Specification, verification and explanation of violation for data-aware compliance rules. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC’09), pp. 500–515. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ayora, C., Torres, V., Pelechano, V.: Variability management in business process models. Technical Report 17, PROS - UPV (2012)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bandinelli, S., Fugetta, A., Ghezzi, C.: Software process model evolution in the SPADE environment. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 19(12), 1128–1144 (1993)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Barba, I., Del Valle, C.: A constraint-based approach for planning and scheduling repeated activities. In: Proceedings of the COPLAS, pp. 55–62 (2011)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Barba, I., Weber, B., Del Valle, C.: Supporting the optimized execution of business processes through recommendations. In: Business Process Management Workshops (1), pp. 135–140 (2011)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Basel Committee on Banking Supervision: Int’l convergence of capital measurement and capital standards: A revised framework – comprehensive version. Technical Report, Bank for Int’l Settlements (2006)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bassil, S., Benyoucef, M., Keller, R., Kropf, P.: Addressing dynamism in e-negotiations by workflow management systems. In: 13th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA 2002). Proceedings of the Workshop on Negotiations in e-Markets – Beyond Price Discovery (DEXA’02). IEEE Computer Society, Aix-en-Provence, France (2002)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bassil, S., Keller, R., Kropf, P.: A workflow–oriented system architecture for the management of container transportation. In: Desel, J., Pernici, B., Weske, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the BPM’04. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3080, pp. 116–131. Potsdam, Germany (2004)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Batory, D.S.: Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. In: 9th International Conference on Software Product Lines. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 7–20. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bauer, T., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Intra-subnet load balancing in distributed workflow management systems. Int. J. Cooper. Inform. Syst. 12(3), 295–324 (2003)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Beck, K.: Extreme Programming Explained. Addison Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Becker, J., Delfmann, P., Knackstedt, R.: Adaptive reference modeling: Integrating configurative and generic adaptation techniques for information models. In: Becker, J., Delfmann, P. (eds.) Reference Modeling. Efficient Information Systems Design Through Reuse of Information Models, pp. 23–49. Physica, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Becker, J., Kugeler, M., Rosemann, M.: Process management: A guide for the design of business processes. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Beckstein, C., Klausner, J.: A planning framework for workflow management. In: Proceedings of the Workshop Intelligent Workflow and Process Management, Stockholm (1999)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bensalem, S., et al.: An overview of SAL. In: Proceedings of the of the 5th NASA Langley Formal Methods Workshop, pp. 187–196. NASA Langley Research Center (2000)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bhattacharya, K., Hull, R., Su, J.: A Data-Centric Design Methodology for Business Processes, pp. 503–531. IGI Global, Hershey (2009)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bobrik, R., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Proviado – personalized and configurable visualizations of business processes. In: Proceedings of the of the 7th International Conference on Electronic Commerce and Web Technologies (EC-WEB’06). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4082, pp. 61–71. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bobrik, R., Reichert, M., Bauer, T.: View-based process visualization. In: Proceedings of the BPM’07. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4714, pp. 88–95. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Boehm, B.W.: Software Engineering Economics. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1981)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bose, R.P.J.C., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Zliobaite, I., Pechenizkiy, M.: Handling concept drift in process mining. In: Mouratidis, H., Rolland, C. (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering - 23rd International Conference, CAiSE 2011, London, UK, June 20-24, 2011. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6741, pp. 391405. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Roberts, D., Brant, J., Johnson, R.: A Refactoring tool for Smalltalk. Theor. Pract. Object Syst. 3, 253–263 (1997)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Canfora, G., Di Penta, M., Esposito, R., Villani, M.L.: A framework for QoS-aware binding and re-binding of composite web services. J. Syst. Software 81(10), 1754–1769 (2008)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Casati, F.: Models, semantics, and formal methods for the design of workflows and their exceptions. Ph.D. thesis, Milano (1998)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Casati, F., Ceri, S., Paraboschi, S., Pozzi, G.: Specification and implementation of exceptions in workflow management systems. ACM TODS 24(3), 405–451 (1999)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Casati, F., Ceri, S., Pernici, B., Pozzi, G.: Workflow evolution. Data Knowl. Eng. 24(3), 211–238 (1998)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Casati, F., Shan, M.C.: Dynamic and adaptive composition of e-services. Inform. Syst. 26(3), 143–163 (2001)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Castellanos, M., Alves de Medeiros, K., Mendling, J., Weber, B., Weitjers, A.J.M.M.: Business process intelligence. In: Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling, pp. 456–480. Idea Group Inc (2009)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Chiao, C.M., Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Towards object-aware process support in healthcare information systems. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on eHealth, Telemedicine, and Social Medicine (eTELEMED 2012), IARIA (2012)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Chiu, D., Li, Q., Karlapalem, K.: Web interface-driven cooperative exception handling in ADOME. Inform. Syst. 26(2), 93–120 (2001)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Cohn, D., Hull, R.: Business artifacts: A data-centric approach to modeling business operations and processes. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 3–9 (2009)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Cohn, M.: Agile Estimating and Planning. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2006)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Combi, C., Gambini, M.: Flaws in the flow: The weakness of unstructured business process modeling languages dealing with data. In: OTM Conferences (1). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5870, pp. 42–59. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Cortadella, J., Kishinevsky, M., Lavagno, L., Yakovlev, A.: Deriving petri nets from finite transition systems. IEEE Trans. Comput. 47(8), 859–882 (1998)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: The ADEPT project: A decade of research and development for robust and flexible process support. Comput. Sci. Res. Dev. 23(2), 81–97 (2009)Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Dadam, P., Reichert, M., Kuhn, K.: Clinical workflows – the killer application for process-oriented information systems? In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Information Systems (BIS’00), pp. 36–59. Poznan, Poland (2000)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Davies, C.T., Jr.: Data processing spheres of control. IBM Syst. J. 17(2), 179–198 (1978)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Deiters, W., Gruhn, V.: The FUNSOFT net appoach to software process management. Int. J. Software Eng. Knowl. Eng. 4(2), 229–256 (1994)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Dijkman, R., Dumas, M., van Dongen, B., Kaarik, R., Mendling, J.: Similarity of business process models: Metrics and evaluation. Inform. Syst. 36(2), 498–516 (2011)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Dijkman, R., Gfeller, B., Küster, J., Völzer, H.: Identifying refactoring opportunities in process model repositories. Inform. Software Tech. 53(9), 937–948 (2011). Studying work practices in Global Software EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Dijkstra, E.W.: Chapter I: Notes on structured programming. In: Dahl, O.J., Dijkstra, E.W., Hoare, C.A.R. (eds.) Structured programming, pp. 1–82. Academic, San Diego (1972)Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Domingos, D., Rito-Silva, A., Veiga, P.: Authorization and access control in adaptive workflows. In: ESORICS 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 23–38. Springer, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Multi-phase process mining: Building instance graphs. In: ER’04. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3288, pp. 362–376. Springer, Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Verbeek, H.M.W.: Verification of EPCs: Using reduction rules and Petri nets. In: CAiSE. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3520, pp. 372–386. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Dourish, P., Holmes, J., MacLean, A., Marqvardsen, P., Zbyslaw, A.: Freeflow: Mediating between representation and action in workflow systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW ’96, pp. 190–198 (1996)Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L., Dijkman, R.M.: Similarity search of business process models. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 23–28 (2009)Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.): Process-Aware Information Systems. Wiley, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Dwyer, M.B., Avrunin, G.S., Corbett, J.C.: Property specification patterns for finite-state verification. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop Formal Methods in Software Practice (FMSP’98). ACM, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Eder, J., Liebhart, W.: Workflow transactions. In: Lawrence, P. (ed.) Workflow Handbook 1997, pp. 195–202. Wiley, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Eder, J., Tahamtan, A.: Temporal conformance of federated choreographies. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA’08), pp. 668–675. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ellis, C.A., Keddara, K., Rozenberg, G.: Dynamic change within workflow systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Organizational Computing Systems (COOCS’95), Milpitas, pp. 10–21 (1995)Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ellis, C.A., Maltzahn, C.: The Chautauqua workflow system. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on System Science. Maui, Hawaii (1997)Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Elmagarmid, A.K. (ed.): Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1992)Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Fahland, D., Woith, H.: Towards process models for disaster response. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.), Business Process Management, 6th International Conference, BPM 2008, Milan, Italy, September 2–4, 2008. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5240, pp. 254–265. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Fent, A., Reiter, H., Freitag, B.: Design for change: Evolving workflow specifications in ULTRAflow. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE’02). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2348, pp. 516–534. Springer, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Fowler, M., Beck, K., Brant, J., Opdyke, W., Roberts, D.: Refactoring: Improving the design of existing code. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Frauenhofer ISST: SPOT Project. http://www.spot.fraunhofer.de/ (2010). Accessed 13 July 2010
  93. 93.
    Gabbay, D., Pnueli, A., Shelah, S., Stavi, J.: On the temporal analysis of fairness. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 163–173 (1980)Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Gawlick, D., Klein, J., Kleissner, K., Salem, K.: Modeling long-running activities as nested Sagas. Data Eng. 14, 14–18 (1991)Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Salem, K.: Sagas. In: Dayal, U., Traiger, I.L. (eds.) Proceedings of the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Management of Data 1987 Annual Conference, San Francisco, California, May 27–29, 1987, pp. 249–259. ACM Press (1987)Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Gebauer, J., Schober, F.: Information system flexibility and the cost efficiency of business processes. J. Assoc. Inform. Syst. 7(3), 122–147 (2006)Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Ghattas, J., Peleg, M., Soffer, P., Denekamp, Y.: Learning the context of a clinical process. In: Business Process Management Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 43, pp. 545–556. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Ghattas, J., Soffer, P., Peleg, M.: A formal model for process context learning. In: Business Process Management Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 43, pp. 140–157. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Auditing business process compliance. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC’07), pp. 169–180. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Giblin, C., Müller, S., Pfitzmann, B.: From regulatory policies to event monitoring rules: Towards model-driven compliance automation. Technical Report, RZ-3662, IBM Research GmbH (2006)Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    van Glabbeek, R., Weijland, W.P.: Branching time and abstraction in bisimulation semantics. J. ACM 43(3), 555–600 (1996)Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Goedertier, S., Vanthienen, J.: Designing compliant business processes with obligations and permissions. In: Proceedings of the BPM’06 Workshops, pp. 5–14. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Gottschalk, F.: Configurable process models. Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H.: Merging event-driven process chains. In: OTM Conferences (1). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5331, pp. 418–426. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., La Rosa, M.: Configurable workflow models. Int. J. Cooper. Inf. Syst. 17(2), 177–221 (2008)Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Gottschalk, F., Wagemakers, T.A.C., Jansen-Vullers, M.H., van der Aalst, W.M.P., La Rosa, M.: Configurable process models: Experiences from a municipality case study. In: CAiSE’09. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5565, pp. 486–500. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Governatori, G., Milosevic, Z., Sadiq, S.: Compliance checking between business processes and business contracts. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC’06), pp. 221–232. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Employing semantically driven adaptation for amalgamating software quality assurance with process management. In: Second International Conference on Adaptive and Self-adaptive Systems and Applications (ADAPTIVE’10), pp. 58–67. Xpert Publ Services, Wilmington (2010)Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Semantic workflow adaption in support of workflow diversity. In: 4th International Conference on Advances in Semantic Processing (SEMAPRO’10), pp. 158–165. Xpert Publ Services, Wilmington (2010)Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Contextual injection of quality measures into software engineering processes. Int. J. Adv. Software 4(1–2), 76–99 (2011)Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Semantically-driven workflow generation using declarative modeling for processes in software engineering. In: Workshops Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOCW 2011, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 164–173. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Towards a workflow language for software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 10th IASTED International Confernece on Software Engineering (SE’11), Innsbruck, Austria. IASTED (2011)Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Grambow, G., Oberhauser, R., Reichert, M.: Towards automatic process-aware coordination in collaborative software engineering. In: ICSOFT’11 (1), Seville, Spain, pp. 5–14. SciTePress (2011)Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Gray, J., Reuter, A.: Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1993)Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Green, T.R.: Cognitive dimensions of notations. In: Proceedings of the BCSHCI ’89, pp. 443–460. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1989)Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Green, T.R., Petre, M.: Usability analysis of visual programming environments: A ‘cognitive dimensions’ framework. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 7(2), 131–174 (1996)Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Grosskopf, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: The Process: Business Process Modeling Using BPMN. Meghan Kiffer Pr, Tampa (2009)Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Complexity metrics for business process models. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Business Information Systems (BIS’06), Klagenfurt, Austria. Lecture Notes in Informatics, vol. 85, pp. 1–12. GI (2006)Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Günther, C.W., Reichert, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Supporting flexible processes with adaptive workflow and case handling. In: Proceedings of the WETICE’08, 3rd IEEE Workshop on Agile Cooperative Process-aware Information Systems (ProGility’08), pp. 229–234. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Günther, C.W., Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Change mining in adaptive process management systems. In: Proceedings of the CoopIS’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4275, pp. 309–326. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Günther, C.W., Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M., van der Aalst, W.M., Recker, J.: Using process mining to learn from process changes in evolutionary systems. Int. J. Bus. Process. Integrat. Manag. 3(1), 61–78 (2008) (Special Issue on Business Process Flexibility)Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Hagen, C., Alonso, G.: Exception handling in workflow management systems. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 26(10), 943–958 (2000)Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Haisjackl, C., Weber, B.: User assistance during process execution – an experimental evaluation of recommendation strategies. In: Business Process Management Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 66, pp. 134–145. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Hallerbach, A.: Management von Prozessvarianten. Ph.D. thesis, University of Ulm (2010)Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Context-based configuration of process variants. In: Proceedings of the TCoB ’08, pp. 31–40. Barcelona (2008)Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing process variants in the process life cycle. In: ICEIS 2008 - Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Barcelona, Spain, June 12–16, 2008, vol. ISAS-2, (3–2), pp. 154–161 (2008)Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Guaranteeing soundness of configurable process variants in Provop. In: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing (CEC’09), pp. 98–105. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Capturing variability in business process models: The Provop approach. J. Software Mainten. Evol. Res. Pract. 22(6/7), 519–546 (2010)Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Configuration and Management of Process Variants, pp. 237–255. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation. Harper Collins, London (1993)Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Hammer, M., Stanton, S.: The Reengineering Revolution – The Handbook. Harper Collins, London (1995)Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Hensinger, C., Reichert, M., Bauer, T., Strzeletz, T., Dadam, P.: ADEPTworkflow – advanced workflow technology for the efficient support of adaptive, enterprise-wide processes. In: Proceedings of the Software Demonstration Track (EDBT’00), Konstanz (2000)Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Herbst, J., Karagiannis, D.: Intergrating machine learning and workflow management to support acquisition and adaption of workflow models. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA’98), Vienna, pp. 745–752 (1998)Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Hochstein, A., Zarnekow, R., Brenner, W.: ITIL as common practice reference model for it service management: Formal assessment and implications for practice. In: IEEE International Conference on e-Technology, e-Commerce, and e-Services (EEE’05), pp. 704–710 (2005)Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Adams, M., Russell, N.: Modern Business Process Automation: YAWL and Its Support Environment. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Huth, M., Ryan, M.: Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning About Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Imai, M.: Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York (1986)Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Jablonski, S., Bussler, C.: Workflow Management: Concepts, Architecture and Implementation. Thompson Publishers, London (1996)Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Joeris, G., Herzog, O.: Managing evolving workflow specifications. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’98), New York, pp. 310–321. IEEE Computer Society (1998)Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Jørgensen, H.D.: Interactive process models. Ph.D. thesis, Trondheim (2004)Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Karbe, B., Ramsperger, N., Weiss, P.: Support of cooperative work by electronic circulation folders. SIGOIS Bull. 11, 109–117 (1990)Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Kiepuszewski, B.: Expressiveness and suitability of languages for control flow modelling in workflows. Ph.D. thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane (2002) (Available via http://www.tm.tue.nl/it/research/patterns)
  143. 143.
    Kiepuszewski, B., ter Hofstede, A., Bussler, C.: On structured workflow modelling. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’00). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1789, pp. 431–445. Springer, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Klingemann, J.: Controlled flexibility in workflow management. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’00. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1789, pp. 126–141. Springer, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Knuplesch, D., Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Pfeifer, H., Dadam, P.: On enabling data-aware compliance checking of business process models. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’2010). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6412, Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Kochut, K., Arnold, J., Sheth, A., Miller, J., Kraemer, E., Arpinar, B., Cardoso, J.: IntelliGEN: A distributed workflow system for discovering protein-protein interactions. Distr. Parallel Databases 13(1), 43–72 (2003)Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Kock, N.F.: Product flow, breadth and complexity of business processes: An empirical study of 15 business processes in three organizations. Bus. Process Re-eng. Manag. J. 2(2), 8–22 (1996)Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Koehler, J., Vanhatalo, J.: Process anti-patterns: How to avoid the common traps of business process modeling. Technical Report RZ-3678, IBM Zurich Research Lab (2007)Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Kokash, N., Krause, C., de Vink, E.: Time and data aware analysis of graphical service models. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods (SEFM’10). IEEE Computer Society, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Kolodner, J.L.: Case-Based Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1993)Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Koschmider, A., Song, M., Reijers, H.A.: Advanced social features in a recommendation system for process modeling. In: Proceedings of the Business Information Systems (BIS’09). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 21, pp. 109–120. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Kowalkiewicz, M., Lu, R., Baeuerle, S., Kruempelmann, M., Lippe, S.: Weak dependencies in business process models. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Business Information Systems (BIS’08). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 7, pp. 177–188, Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Kradolfer, M., Geppert, A.: Dynamic workflow schema evolution based on workflow type versioning and workflow migration. Technical Report 98.02, University of Zurich, Department of Computer Science (1998)Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    Kradolfer, M., Geppert, A.: Dynamic workflow schema evolution based on workflow type versioning and workflow migration. In: Proceedings of the International Conference in Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’99), Edinburgh, pp. 104–114 (1999)Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Integrating users in object-aware process management systems: Issues and challenges. In: BPM’09 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 43, pp. 29–41. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Towards object-aware process management systems: Issues, challenges, benefits. In: BPMDS/EMMSAD’09. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 29, pp. 197–210. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: A Modeling Paradigm for Integrating Processes and Data at the Micro Level. In: Proceedings of the BPMDS’11. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, pp. 201–215. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: PHILharmonicFlows: Towards a framework for object-aware process management. J. Software Mainten. Evol. Res. Pract. 23(4), 205–244 (2011)Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Striving for object-aware process support: How existing approaches fit together. In: Aberer, K., Damiani, E., Dillon, T. (eds.) 1st International Symposium on Data-driven Process Discovery and Analysis (SIMPDA’11), Campione d’Italia, Italy (2011)Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Künzle, V., Weber, B., Reichert, M.: Object-aware business processes: Fundamental requirements and their support in existing approaches. Int. J. Inform. Syst. Model. Des. 2, 19–46 (2010)Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Küster, J.M., Gerth, C., Förster, A., Engels, G.: Detecting and resolving process model differences in the absence of a change log. In: BPM’08. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5240, pp. 244–260. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    La Rosa, M.: Managing variability in process-aware information systems. Ph.D. thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia (2009)Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    La Rosa, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Questionnaire-based variability modeling for system configuration. Software Syst. Model. 8(2), 251–274 (2009)Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Modelling business process variability for design-time configuration. In: Cardoso, J., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling, pp. 204–228. Idea Group Inc (2009)Google Scholar
  165. 165.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Mendling, J.: Configurable multi-perspective business process models. Inf. Syst. 36(2), 313–340 (2011)Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Mendling, J., Gottschalk, F.: Beyond control-flow: Extending business process configuration to roles and objects. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’08). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5231, pp. 199–215. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Uba, R., Dijkman, R.M.: Merging business process models. In: OTM Conferences (1). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6426, pp. 96–113. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Lanz, A., Kreher, U., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Enabling process support for advanced applications with the AristaFlow BPM Suite. In: Proceedings of the Business Process Management 2010 Demonstration Track, no. 615 in CEUR Workshop Proceedings (2010)Google Scholar
  169. 169.
    Lanz, A., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Robust and flexible error handling in the AristaFlow BPM Suite. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’10 Forum, Information Systems Evolution. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 72, pp. 174–189. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  170. 170.
    Lanz, A., Weber, B., Reichert, M.: Workflow time patterns for process-aware information systems. In: Proceedings of the BPMDS and EMMSAD 2010. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 50, pp. 94–107. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Laue, R., Mendling, J.: Structuredness and its significance for correctness of process models. Inform. Syst. E-Business Manag. 8, 287–307 (2010)Google Scholar
  172. 172.
    Lenz, R., Reichert, M.: IT support for healthcare processes – premises, challenges, perspectives. Data Knowl. Eng. 61(1), 39–58 (2007)Google Scholar
  173. 173.
    de Leoni, M.: Adaptive process management in highly dynamic and pervasive scenarios. In: Proceedings of the Fourth European Young Researchers Workshop on Service Oriented Computing (YR-SOC 2009). Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 2, pp. 83–97. Open, Publ. Assoc., Australia (2009)Google Scholar
  174. 174.
    Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: Refactoring of activity labels in business process models. In: 15th International Conference on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems (NLDB 2010). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6177, pp. 268–276. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  175. 175.
    Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: Recognizing activity labeling styles in business process models. Enterpr. Mod. Inf. Sys. Architect. 6(1), 16–29 [Int’l Journal (EMISA Journal)] (2011)Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Lerner, B.S., Christov, S., Osterweil, L.J., Bendraou, R., Kannengiesser, U., Wise, A.E.: Exception handling patterns for process modeling. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 36(2), 162–183 (2010)Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Leymann, F.: Supporting business transactions via partial recovery in workflow management systems. In: Proceedings of the Datenbanksysteme in Büro, Technik und Wissenschaft (BTW’95), Dresden, pp. 51–70 (1995)Google Scholar
  178. 178.
    Leymann, F., Roller, D.: Production Workflow. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (2000)Google Scholar
  179. 179.
    Li, C.: Mining process model variants: Challenges, techniques, examples. Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: Discovering reference process models by mining process variants. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Web Services (ICWS’08), pp. 45–53. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  181. 181.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: On measuring process model similarity based on high-level change operations. In: Proceedings of the ER’08. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5231, pp. 248–264. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  182. 182.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: Discovering reference models by mining process variants using a heuristic approach. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM’09). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5701, pp. 344–362. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  183. 183.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: Mining based on learning from process change logs. In: Proceedings of the BPM’08 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 17, pp. 121–133. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  184. 184.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: What are the problem makers: Ranking activities according to their relevance for process changes. In: IEEE 7th International Conference on Web Services (ICWS’09), pp. 51–58. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  185. 185.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: The MinAdept clustering approach for discovering reference process models out of process variants. Int. J. Cooper. Inform. Syst. 19(3–4), 159–203 (2010)Google Scholar
  186. 186.
    Li, C., Reichert, M., Wombacher, A.: Mining business process variants: Challenges, scenarios, algorithms. Data Knowl. Eng. 70(5), 409–434 (2011)Google Scholar
  187. 187.
    Liu, C., Conradi, R.: Automatic replanning of task networks for process model evolution. In: Proceedings of the European Software Engineering Conference, pp. 434–450. Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany (1993)Google Scholar
  188. 188.
    Liu, R., Bhattacharya, K., Wu, F.Y.: Modeling business contexture and behavior using business artifacts. Adv. Inform. Syst. Eng. 4495, 324–339 (2007)Google Scholar
  189. 189.
    Liu, Y., Müller, S., Xu, K.: A static compliance-checking framework for business process models. IBM Syst. J. 46(2), 335–261 (2007)Google Scholar
  190. 190.
    Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Compact representations and efficient algorithms for operating guidelines. Fundam. Inform. 108(1–2), 43–62 (2011)Google Scholar
  191. 191.
    Lu, R., Sadiq, S.W.: Managing process variants as an information resource. In: Proceedings of the BPM’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 426–431. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  192. 192.
    Luengo, D., Seplveda, M.: Applying clustering in process mining to find different versions of a business process that changes over time. In: Business Process Management Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 99. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  193. 193.
    Luger, G.F.: Artificial Intelligence: Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem Solving. Pearson/Addison Wesley, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  194. 194.
    Luo, Z., Sheth, A., Kochut, K., Miller, J.: Exception handling in workflow systems. Appl. Intell. 13(2), 125–147 (2000)Google Scholar
  195. 195.
    Ly, L.T., Knuplesch, D., Rinderle-Ma, S., Göser, K., Pfeifer, H., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: SeaFlows Toolset – compliance verification made easy for process-aware information systems. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’10 Forum. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 72, pp. 76–91. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  196. 196.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Integration and verification of semantic constraints in adaptive process management systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 64(1), 3–23 (2008)Google Scholar
  197. 197.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: Mining staff assignment rules from event-based data. In: Proceedings of the BPM’05 Workshops, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3812, pp. 177–190. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  198. 198.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P.: Design and verification of instantiable compliance rule graphs in process-aware information systems. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Advanced Systems Engineering (CAiSE’10), pp. 9–23. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  199. 199.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Göser, K., Dadam, P.: On enabling integrated process compliance with semantic constraints in process management systems – requirements, challenges, solutions. Inf. Sys. Front. 14(2), 195–219 (2012) (Special Issue Governance, Risk and Compliance)Google Scholar
  200. 200.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Knuplesch, D., Dadam, P.: Monitoring business process compliance using compliance rule graphs. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’11). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7044, pp. 82–99. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  201. 201.
    Maggi, F., Montali, M., Westergaard, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Monitoring business constraints with linear temporal logic: An approach based on colored automata. In: Proceedings of the BPM 2011. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  202. 202.
    Malone, T., Crowston, K., Herman, G.: Organizing Business Knowledge: The MIT Process Handbook. MIT, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  203. 203.
    Mann, J.E.: Workflow and EAI. EAI J. 1(3), 49–53 (1999)Google Scholar
  204. 204.
    Mans, R.S., Russell, N.C., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Moleman, A.J., Bakker., P.J.M.: Schedule-aware workflow management systems. In: T. Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency, vol. 4. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6550, pp. 121–143. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  205. 205.
    McCarthy, D., Sarin, S.: Workflow and transactions in inconcert. IEEE Bull. Data Eng. 16(2), 53–56 (1993)Google Scholar
  206. 206.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: How to define activity labels for business process models? In: Proceedings of the AIS SIGSAND’08, pp. 117–127 (2008)Google Scholar
  207. 207.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Inform. Software Tech. 52(2), 127–136 (2010)Google Scholar
  208. 208.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Recker, J.: Activity labeling in process modeling: Empirical insights and recommendations. Inform. Syst. 35(4), 467–482 (2010)Google Scholar
  209. 209.
    Mendling, J., Verbeek, H.M.W., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Neumann, G.: Detection and prediction of errors in EPCs of the SAP reference model. Data Know. Eng. 64(1), 312–329 (2008)Google Scholar
  210. 210.
    Mens, T., Gorp, P.V.: A taxonomy of model transformation. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 152, 125–142 (2006)Google Scholar
  211. 211.
    Mens, T., Tourwe, T.: A survey of software refactoring. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 30(2), 126–139 (2004).Google Scholar
  212. 212.
    Meyer, H., Weske, M.: Automated service composition using heuristic search. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference Business Process Management (BPM’06), Vienna, Austria. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 81–96. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  213. 213.
    Miller, G.: The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81–97 (1956)Google Scholar
  214. 214.
    Minor, M., Bergmann, R., Görg, S., Walter, K.: Towards case-based adaptation of workflows. In: ICCBR’11. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6880, pp. 421–435. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  215. 215.
    Minor, M., Bergmann, R., Görg, S., Walter, K.: Reasoning on business processes to support change reuse. In: CEC’11, pp. 18–25. IEE Computer Press (2011)Google Scholar
  216. 216.
    Minor, M., Schmalen, D., Koldehoff, A., Bergmann, R.: Structural adaptation of workflows supported by a suspension mechanism and by case-based reasoning. In: Proceedings of the WETICE’07, pp. 370–375. IEE Computer Society (2007)Google Scholar
  217. 217.
    Minor, M., Tartakovski, A., Bergmann, R.: Representation and structure-based similarity assessment for agile workflows. In: Proceedings of the ICCBR’07. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4626, pp. 224–238. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  218. 218.
    Minor, M., Tartakovski, A., Schmalen, D., Bergmann, R.: Agile workflow technology and case-based change reuse for long-term processes. Int. J. Intell. Inform. Tech. 4(1), 80–98 (2008)Google Scholar
  219. 219.
    Montali, M.: Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  220. 220.
    Montali, M., Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Storari, S.: Declarative specification and verification of service choreographiess. TWEB 4(1) (2010)Google Scholar
  221. 221.
    Moss, E.: Nested Transactions. MIT, Cambridge (1985)Google Scholar
  222. 222.
    Mourao, H., Antunes, P.: Supporting effective unexpected exceptions handling in workflow management systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Applied computing (SAC’07), pp. 1242–1249. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  223. 223.
    Müller, D., Herbst, J., Hammori, M., Reichert, M.: IT support for release management processes in the automotive industry. In: Proceedings of the BPM’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 368–377. Springer, Vienna (2006)Google Scholar
  224. 224.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: Flexibility of data-driven process structures. In: BPM’06 International Workshops, Workshop on Dynamic Process Management (DPM’06), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4103, pp. 181–192. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  225. 225.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: Data-driven modeling and coordination of large process structures. In: OTM Conferences (1). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4803, pp. 131–149. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  226. 226.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: A new paradigm for the enactment and dynamic adaptation of data-driven process structures. In: CAiSE’08. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5074, pp. 48–63. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  227. 227.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J., Köntges, D., Neubert, A.: COREPRO-Sim: A tool for modeling, simulating and adapting data-driven process structures. In: 6th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM’08 Demonstrations). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5240, pp. 394–397. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  228. 228.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J., Poppa, F.: Data-driven design of engineering processes with COREPRO-modeler. In: 16th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE 2007), pp. 376–378. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  229. 229.
    Müller, R.: Event-oriented dynamic adaptation of workflows. Ph.D. thesis, University of Leipzig, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  230. 230.
    Müller, R., Greiner, U., Rahm, E.: AgentWork: A workflow system supporting rule–based workflow adaptation. Data Knowl. Eng. 51(2), 223–256 (2004)Google Scholar
  231. 231.
    Müller, R., Rahm, E.: Dealing with logical failures for collaborating workflows. In: Proceedings of the International Conference in Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’00), Eilat, pp. 210–223 (2000)Google Scholar
  232. 232.
    Mutschler, B., Reichert, M., Bumiller, J.: Unleashing the effectiveness of process-oriented information systems: Problem analysis, critical success factors and implications. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 38(3), 280–291 (2008)Google Scholar
  233. 233.
    Mutschler, B., Weber, B., Reichert, M.: Workflow management versus case handling - results from a controlled software experiment. In: Proceedings of the SAC’08, pp. 82–89. ACM Press (2008)Google Scholar
  234. 234.
    Nagl, C., Rosenberg, F., Dustdar, S.: Vidre – a distributed service-oriented business rule engine based on ruleml. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2006), pp. 35–44. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  235. 235.
    Namiri, K., Stojanovic, N.: Pattern-based design and validation of business process compliance. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’07), pp. 59–76. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  236. 236.
    OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0 (2007)Google Scholar
  237. 237.
    Oberleitner, J., Rosenberg, F., Dustdar, S.: A lightweight model-driven orchestration engine for e-services. In: TES. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3811, pp. 48–57. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  238. 238.
    Ohno, T.: Toyota Production System. Productivity Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  239. 239.
    Opdyke, W.F.: Refactoring: A program restrucuring aid in designing object-oriented application frameworks. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois (1992)Google Scholar
  240. 240.
    Ouyang, C., Dumas, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Mendling, J.: From business process models to process-oriented software systems. ACM Trans. Software Eng. Methodol. 19(1), 1–37 (2009)Google Scholar
  241. 241.
    Pande, P., Neuman, R., Cavanagh, R.: The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies Are Honing Their Performance. Mc-Graw Hill, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  242. 242.
    Peleg, M., Somekh, J., Dori, D.: A methodology for eliciting and modeling exceptions. J. Biomed. Informat. 42, 736–747 (2009)Google Scholar
  243. 243.
    Pesic, M.: Constraint-based workflow management systems: Shifting control to users. Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology (2008)Google Scholar
  244. 244.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, M.H., Sidorova, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Constraint-based workflow models: Change made easy. In: Proceedings of the CoopIS’07. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4803, pp. 77–94. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  245. 245.
    Pichler, P., Weber, B., Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Imperative versus declarative process modeling languages: An empirical investigation. In: Proceedings of the ER-BPM ’11. Business Process Management Workshops (1). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 99, pp. 383–394. Springer, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  246. 246.
    Polyvyanyy, A., García-Bañuelos, L., Dumas, M.: Structuring acyclic process models. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM’10), Hoboken, NJ, USA.. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6336, pp. 276–293. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  247. 247.
    Poppendieck, M., Poppendieck, T.: Implementing Lean Software Development: From Concept to Cash. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2006)Google Scholar
  248. 248.
    Pryss, R., Tiedeken, J., Kreher, U., Reichert, M.: Towards flexible process support on mobile devices. In: CAiSE Forum. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 72, pp. 150–165. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  249. 249.
    Puhlmann, F.: Soundness verification of business processes specified in the pi-calculus. In: OTM Conferences (1). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4803, pp. 6–23. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  250. 250.
    van Dongen, B.F., Dijkman, R.M., Mendling, J.: Measuring similarity between business process models. In: Proceedings of the CAISE’08 conference. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5074, pp. 450–464. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  251. 251.
    Rao, J., Su, X.: A survey of automated web service composition methods. In: SWSWPC. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3387, pp. 43–54. Springer, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  252. 252.
    Redding, G.M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Iordachescu, A.: A flexible, object-centric approach for business process modelling. Service Oriented Comput. Appl. 4(3), 191–201 (2009)Google Scholar
  253. 253.
    Redding, G.M., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Iordachescu, A.: Transforming object-oriented models to process-oriented models. In: Proceedings of the BPM’07 Workshops. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4928, pp. 132–143. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  254. 254.
    Regev, G., Soffer, P., Schmidt, R.: Taxonomy of flexibility in business processes. In: BPMDS. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 236. CEUR-WS.org (2006)Google Scholar
  255. 255.
    Reichert, M.: Dynamische Ablaufänderungen in Workflow-Management-Systemen. Ph.D. thesis, University of Ulm (2000) (in German)Google Scholar
  256. 256.
    Reichert, M.: What BPM technology can do for healthcare process support. In: 13th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIME’11). Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 6747, pp. 2–13. Springer, Belin (2011)Google Scholar
  257. 257.
    Reichert, M., Bassil, S., Bobrik, R., Bauer, T.: The Proviado access control model for business process monitoring components. Enterprise Model. Inform. Syst. Architect. 5(3), 64–88 (2010)Google Scholar
  258. 258.
    Reichert, M., Bauer, T., Dadam, P.: Enterprise-wide and cross-enterprise workflow-management: Challenges and research issues for adaptive workflows. In: Enterprise-wide and Cross-enterprise Workflow Management. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 24, pp. 56–64. CEUR-WS.org (1999)Google Scholar
  259. 259.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: A framework for dynamic changes in workflow management systems. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, pp. 42–48. IEEE Computer Society Press (1997)Google Scholar
  260. 260.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPTflex – supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Intell. Inform. Syst. 10(2), 93–129 (1998)Google Scholar
  261. 261.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Enabling adaptive process-aware information systems with ADEPT2. In: Cardoso, J., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Business Process Modeling, pp. 173–203. Information Science Reference, Hershey (2009)Google Scholar
  262. 262.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P., Bauer, T.: Dealing with forward and backward jumps in workflow management systems. Software Syst. Model. 1(2), 37–58 (2003)Google Scholar
  263. 263.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P., Rinderle-Ma, S., Jurisch, M., Kreher, U., Goeser, K.: Architectural principles and components of adaptive process management technology. In: Process Innovation for Enterprise Software. LNI, vol. 151, pp. 81–97. GI, Koellen-Verlag. IEEE Computer Society Press (2009)Google Scholar
  264. 264.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P., Rinderle-Ma, S., Lanz, A., Pryss, R., Predeschly, M., Kolb, J., Ly, L.T., Jurisch, M., Kreher, U., Göser, K.: Enabling Poka-Yoke workflows with the AristaFlow BPM Suite. In: CEUR Proceedings of the BPM’09 Demonstration Track, Business Process Management Conference 2009 (BPM’09). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 489. CEUR-WS.org (2009)Google Scholar
  265. 265.
    Reichert, M., Hensinger, C., Dadam, P.: Supporting adaptive workflows in advanced application environments. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Workflow Management Systems (EDBT’98), Valencia, Spain, pp. 100–109 (1998)Google Scholar
  266. 266.
    Reichert, M., Kolb, J., Bobrik, R., Bauer, T.: Enabling personalized visualization of large business processes through parameterizable views. In: 9th Enterprise Engineering Track at 27th ACM Symposium On Applied Computing (SAC’12), pp. 1653–1660. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  267. 267.
    Reichert, M., Kuhn, K., Dadam, P.: Prozessreengineering und -automatisierung in klinischen Anwendungsumgebungen. In: Proc. 41. Jahrestagung (GMDS ’96), Bonn, pp. 219–223 (1996)Google Scholar
  268. 268.
    Reichert, M., Rechtenbach, S., Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T.: Extending a business process modeling tool with process configuration facilities: The Provop demonstrator. In: BPM Demos. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 489. CEUR-WS.org (2009)Google Scholar
  269. 269.
    Reichert, M., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: ADEPT workflow management system: Flexible support for enterprise-wide business processes. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM’03). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2678, pp. 370–379. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  270. 270.
    Reichert, M., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: On the common support of workflow type and instance changes under correctness constraints. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’03). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Catania, Italy, vol. 2888, pp. 407–425 (2003)Google Scholar
  271. 271.
    Reichert, M., Rinderle, S., Kreher, U., Dadam, P.: Adaptive process management with ADEPT2. In: Proceedings of the ICDE’05, pp. 1113–1114. IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  272. 272.
    Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P.: Flexibility in process-aware information systems. In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency II. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5460, pp. 115–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  273. 273.
    Reijers, H.A.: Design and Control of Workflow Processes: Business Process Management for the Service Industry. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  274. 274.
    Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The effectiveness of workflow management systems: Predictions and lessons learned. Int. J. Inform. Manag. 25(5), 458–472 (2005)Google Scholar
  275. 275.
    Reijers., H.A., Liman, S., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Product-based workflow design. Manag. Inform. Syst. 20(1), 229–262 (2003)Google Scholar
  276. 276.
    Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.M.: Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. Inform. Syst. 36(5), 881–897 (2011)Google Scholar
  277. 277.
    Reijers, H.A., Rigter, J.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The case handling case. Int. J. Cooper. Inform. Syst. 12(3), 365–392 (2003)Google Scholar
  278. 278.
    Reinhartz-Berger, I., Soffer, P., Sturm, A.: Organisational reference models: Supporting an adequate design of local business processes. Int. J. Bus. Process Integrat. Manag. 4(2), 134–149 (2009)Google Scholar
  279. 279.
    Reinhartz-Berger, I., Soffer, P., Sturm, A.: Extending the adaptability of reference models. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. A 40(5), 1045–1056 (2010)Google Scholar
  280. 280.
    Reuter, A., Schwenkreis, F.: ConTracts – a low-level mechanism for building general-purpose workflow management-systems. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 18(1), 4–10 (1995)Google Scholar
  281. 281.
    Reuter, C., Dadam, P., Rudolph, S., Deiters, W., Trillsch, S.: Guarded process spaces (GPS): A navigation system towards creation and dynamic change of healthcare processes from the end-user’s perspective. In: Proceedings of the BPM’11 Workshops, 4th International Workshop on Process-oriented Information Systems in Healthcare (ProHealth’11). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  282. 282.
    Rinderle, S.: Schema evolution in process management systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of Ulm (2004)Google Scholar
  283. 283.
    Rinderle, S., Jurisch, M., Reichert, M.: On deriving net change information from change logs – the deltalayer-algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 12th Conference Datenbanksysteme in Business, Technologie und Web (BTW’07). Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), vol. P-103, pp. 364–381. GI, Bonn (2007)Google Scholar
  284. 284.
    Rinderle, S., Kreher, U., Lauer, M., Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: On representing instance changes in adaptive process management systems. In: Proceedings of the WETICE’06 Workshops, pp. 297–304. IEEE Computer Society (2006)Google Scholar
  285. 285.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M.: On the controlled evolution of access rules in cooperative information systems. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’05). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3760, pp. 238–255. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  286. 286.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M.: Data-driven process control and exception handling in process management systems. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’06). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4001, pp. 273–287. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  287. 287.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Evaluation of correctness criteria for dynamic workflow changes. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM’03). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2678, pp. 41–57. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  288. 288.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Correctness criteria for dynamic changes in workflow systems – a survey. Data Knowl. Eng. 50(1), 9–34 (2004)Google Scholar
  289. 289.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Disjoint and overlapping process changes: Challenges, solutions, applications. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS’04). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Agia Napa, vol. 3290, pp. 101–120 (2004)Google Scholar
  290. 290.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: Flexible support of team processes by adaptive workflow systems. Distr. Parallel Databases 16(1), 91–116 (2004)Google Scholar
  291. 291.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: On dealing with structural conflicts between process type and instance changes. In: Proceedings of the BPM’04. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3080, pp. 274–289. Springer, Potsdam (2004)Google Scholar
  292. 292.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Jurisch, M., Kreher, U.: On representing, purging, and utilizing change logs in process management systems. In: Proceedings of the BPM’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 241–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  293. 293.
    Rinderle, S., Weber, B., Reichert, M., Wild, W.: Integrating process learning and process evolution – a semantics based approach. In: Proceedings of the BPM’05. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 252–267. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  294. 294.
    Rinderle, S., Wombacher, A., Reichert, M.: Evolution of process choreographies in dychor. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CooplS’06). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4275, pp. 273–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  295. 295.
    Rinderle, S., Wombacher, A., Reichert, M.: On the controlled evolution of process choreographies. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE’06), p. #124. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  296. 296.
    Rinderle-Ma, S.: Data flow correctness in adaptive workflow systems. EMISA Forum 29(2), 25–35 (2009)Google Scholar
  297. 297.
    Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M.: A formal framework for adaptive access control models. J. Data Semant. IX. 4601, 82–112 (2007)Google Scholar
  298. 298.
    Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M.: Comprehensive life cycle support for access rules in information systems: The CEOSIS project. Enterprise Inform. Syst. 3(3), 219–251 (2009)Google Scholar
  299. 299.
    Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M.: Advanced migration strategies for adaptive process management systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing (CEC’ 10), pp. 56–63. IEEE, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  300. 300.
    Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M., Weber, B.: On the formal semantics of change patterns in process-aware information systems. In: Proceedings of the ER’08. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5231, pp. 279–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  301. 301.
    Rinderle-Ma, S., Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Relaxed compliance notions in adaptive process management systems. In: Proceedings of the ER’08. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5231, pp. 232–247. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar
  302. 302.
    Rolland, C.: A comprehensive view of process engineering. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’98. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1413, pp. 1–24. Springer, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  303. 303.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A configurable reference modelling language. Inform. Syst. 32(1), 1–23 (2005)Google Scholar
  304. 304.
    Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Decision mining in ProM. In: Business Process Management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4102, pp. 420–425. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  305. 305.
    Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Inform. Syst. 33(1), 64–95 (2008)Google Scholar
  306. 306.
    Rupietta, W.: Workparty – business processes and workflow management. In: Bernus, P., Mertins, K., Schmidt, G. (eds.) Handbook on Architectures of Information Systems, Int’l Handbooks Information System, pp. 569–589. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  307. 307.
    Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Workflow exception patterns. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4001, pp. 288–302. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  308. 308.
    Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Exception handling patterns in process-aware information systems. Technical Report BPM Center Report BPM-06-04, BPMcenter.org (2006)Google Scholar
  309. 309.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Mulyar, N.: Workflow control-flow patterns: A revised view. Technical Report BPM-06-22, BPMcenter.org (2006)Google Scholar
  310. 310.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow data patterns. Technical Report FIT-TR-2004-01, Queensland University of Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  311. 311.
    Russell, N., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow resource patterns. Technical Report WP 127, Eindhoven University of Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  312. 312.
    Sadiq, S., Governatori, G., Naimiri, K.: Modeling control objectives for business process compliance. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Business Process Management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4714, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  313. 313.
    Sadiq, S., Marjanovic, O., Orlowska, M.: Managing change and time in dynamic workflow processes. Int. J Cooper. Inform. Syst. 9(1–2), 93–116 (2000)Google Scholar
  314. 314.
    Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M.: On capturing exceptions on workflow process models. In: Proceedings of the BIS’2000, pp. 3–19. Springer, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  315. 315.
    Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M., Sadiq, W., Schulz, K.: When workflows will not deliver: The case of contradicting work practice. In: BIS (2005)Google Scholar
  316. 316.
    Sadiq, S., Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.: Pockets of flexibility in workflow specifications. In: Proceedings of the ER’01. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2224, pp. 513–526. Springer, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  317. 317.
    Sadiq, S., Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.: A framework for constraint specification and validation in flexible workflows. Inform. Syst. 30(5), 349–378 (2005)Google Scholar
  318. 318.
    Sadiq, S.W., Orlowska, M.E., Sadiq, W., Foulger, C.: Data flow and validation in workflow modelling. In: Proceedings of the ADC’04. CRPIT, vol. 27, pp. 207–214. Australian Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  319. 319.
    Scheer, A.W.: ARIS. Vom Geschftsprozess zum Anwendungssystem. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  320. 320.
    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
  321. 321.
    Schonenberg, H., Mans, R., Russell, N., Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process flexibility: A survey of contemporary approaches. In: CIAO!/EOMAS, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 10, pp. 16–30. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  322. 322.
    Schonenberg, H., Weber, B., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Supporting flexible processes through recommendations based on history. In: Proceedings of the BPM’08. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5240, pp. 51–66. Springer, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  323. 323.
    Schultheiss, B., Meyer, J., Mangold, R., Zemmler, T., Reichert, M.: Designing the processes for chemotherapy treatment in a women’s hospital (in german). Technical report, University of Ulm (1996)Google Scholar
  324. 324.
    Schuschel, H., Weske, M.: Integrated workflow planning and coordination. In: Database and Expert Systems Applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2736, pp. 771–781. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  325. 325.
    Schuschel, H., Weske, M.: Triggering replanning in an integrated workflow planning and enactment system. In: ADBIS. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3255, pp. 322–335. Springer, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  326. 326.
    Sharp, A., McDermott, P.: Workflow modeling: tools for process improvement and application development. Artech House, Norwood (2001)Google Scholar
  327. 327.
    Sidorova, N., Stahl, C., Trcka, N.: Workflow soundness revisited: Checking correctness in the presence of data while staying conceptual. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’10. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6051, pp. 530–544. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  328. 328.
    Silver, B.: BPMS watch: Ten tips for effective process modeling. Http://www.bpminstitute.org/articles/article/article/bpms-watch-ten-tips-for-effective-process-modeling.html (2009). Accessed 23 July 2012
  329. 329.
    Silver, B.: Case management: Addressing unique BPM requirements. In: Fischer, L. (ed.) Taming the Unpredictable: Real-World Adaptive Case Management, pp. 1–12. Future Strategies, Inc., Lighthouse Point (2011)Google Scholar
  330. 330.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Wu, D., Hendler, J., Nau, D.: Htn planning for web service composition using shop2. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 1(4), 377–396 (2004) (Int’l Semantic Web Conf 2003)Google Scholar
  331. 331.
    Smirnov, S., Reijers, H.A., Weske, M., Nugteren, T.: Business process model abstraction: A definition, catalog, and survey. Distr. Parallel Databases 30(1), 63–99 (2012)Google Scholar
  332. 332.
    Soffer, P.: Mirror, mirror on the wall, can i count on you at all? Exploring data inaccuracy in business processes. In: BMMDS/EMMSAD, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 50, pp. 14–25. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  333. 333.
    Song, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Towards comprehensive support for organizational mining. Decis. Support Syst. 46(1), 300–317 (2008)Google Scholar
  334. 334.
    Strong, D.M., Miller, S.M.: Exceptions and exception handling in computerized information processes. ACM–TOIS 13(2), 206–233 (1995)Google Scholar
  335. 335.
    Sun, S.X., Zhao, J.L., Nunamaker, J.F., Sheng, O.R.L.: Formulating the data-flow perspective for business process management. Inform. Syst. Res. 17(4), 374–391 (2006)Google Scholar
  336. 336.
    Swenson, K.D.: Mastering the Unpredictable: How Adaptive Case Management Will Revolutionize the Way That Knowledge Workers Get Things Done. Meghan-Kiffer Press, Tampa, FL (2010)Google Scholar
  337. 337.
    Trcka, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Sidorova, N.: Data-flow anti-patterns: Discovering data-flow errors in workflows. In: CAiSE. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5565, pp. 425–439. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  338. 338.
    United States Code: Sarbanes-oxley act of 2002, pl 107–204, 116 stat 745. Codified in Sections 11, 15, 18, 28, and 29 USC (2002)Google Scholar
  339. 339.
    V. Glabbeek, R., Goltz, U.: Refinement of actions and equivalence notions for concurrent systems. Acta Inform 37(4–5), 229–327 (2001)Google Scholar
  340. 340.
    Vanderfeesten, I.: Product-based design and support of workflow processes. Ph.D. thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology (2009)Google Scholar
  341. 341.
    Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Product-based workflow support. Inform. Syst. 36(2), 517–535 (2011)Google Scholar
  342. 342.
    Vanhatalo, J., Voelzer, H., Koehler, J.: The refined process structure tree. Data Knowl. Eng. 69(8), 793–818 (2009)Google Scholar
  343. 343.
    Verbeek, E.: Verification of WF–Nets. Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Eindhoven (2004)Google Scholar
  344. 344.
    Verbeek, H.M.W., Basten, T., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Diagnosing workflow processes using Woflan. Comput. J. 44(4), 246–279 (2001)Google Scholar
  345. 345.
    Wagenknecht, A., Rüppel, U.: Improving resource management in flood response with process models and web GIS. In: 16th TIEMS 2009, pp. 141–151 (2009). ISBN 987-7-302-18670-0Google Scholar
  346. 346.
    Waimer, M.: Integration of adaptive process management technology and process mining (in german). Ph.D. thesis, Diploma Thesis, University of Ulm (2006)Google Scholar
  347. 347.
    Wainer, J., Bezerra, F., Barthelmess, P.: Tucupi: A flexible workflow system based on overridable constraints. In: Proceedings of the SAC ’04, pp. 498–502. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  348. 348.
    Wainer, J., de Lima Bezerra, F.: Constraint-based flexible workflows. In: CRIWG. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2806, pp. 151–158. Springer, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  349. 349.
    Weber, B., Mutschler, B., Reichert, M.: Investigating the effort of using business process management technology: Results from a controlled experiment. Sci. Comput. Program. 75(5), 292–310 (2010)Google Scholar
  350. 350.
    Weber, B., Pinggera, J., Zugal, S., Wild, W.: Alaska simulator toolset for conducting controlled experiments on process flexibility. In: Information Systems Evolution. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 72, pp. 205–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  351. 351.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: Refactoring large process model repositories computers and industry. Comput. Ind. 62, 467–486 (2011)Google Scholar
  352. 352.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Change patterns and change support features -enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data Know. Eng. 66(3), 438–466 (2008)Google Scholar
  353. 353.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Wild, W.: Case-base maintenance for CCBR-based process evolution. In: Proceedings of the ECCBR’06. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4106, pp. 106–120. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  354. 354.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Wild, W., Rinderle, S.: Balancing flexibility and security in adaptive process management systems. In: Proceedings of the CoopIS’05. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3760, pp. 59–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  355. 355.
    Weber, B., Reichert, M., Wild, W., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Providing integrated life cycle support in process-aware information systems. Int. J. Cooper. Inform. Syst. 18(1), 115–165 (2009)Google Scholar
  356. 356.
    Weber, B., Reijers, H.A., Zugal, S., Wild, W.: The declarative approach to business process execution: An empirical test. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’09. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5565, pp. 470–485. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  357. 357.
    Weber, B., Rinderle, S., Reichert, M.: Change patterns and change support features in process-aware information systems. In: Proceedings of the CAiSE’07. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4495, pp. 574–588. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  358. 358.
    Weber, B., Rinderle, S., Wild, W., Reichert, M.: CCBR–driven business process evolution. In: Proceedings of the ICCBR’05. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3620, pp. 610–624. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  359. 359.
    Weber, B., Wild, W., Breu, R.: CBRFlow: Enabling adaptive workflow management through conversational cbr. In: Proceedings of the ECCBR’04. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3155, pp. 434–448. Springer, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  360. 360.
    Weber, I., Hoffmann, J., Mendling, J.: Semantic business process validation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management (SBPM’08), CEUR-WS Proceedings, vol. 472, RWTH, Aachen, Germany (2008)Google Scholar
  361. 361.
    Weijters, A.J.M.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Rediscovering workflow models from event-based data using little thumb. Integr. Comput. Aided Eng. 10, 151–162 (2003)Google Scholar
  362. 362.
    Weikum, G., Schek, H.J.: Concepts and applications of multilevel transactions and open nested transactions. In: Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1992)Google Scholar
  363. 363.
    Weske, M.: Flexible modeling and execution of workflow activities. In: Proceedings of the 31st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS ’98), Hawaii, pp. 713–722. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  364. 364.
    Weske, M.: Workflow management systems: Formal foundation, conceptual design, implementation aspects. University of Münster, Germany (2000). Habil ThesisGoogle Scholar
  365. 365.
    Weske, M.: Formal foundation and conceptual design of dynamic adaptations in a workflow management system. In: Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-34). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  366. 366.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Methods, Technology. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  367. 367.
    Workflow Management Coalition: Terminology & glossary. Technical Report WFMC-TC-1011, WfMC (1999)Google Scholar
  368. 368.
    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)Google Scholar
  369. 369.
    Zeng, L., Ngu, A., Benatallah, B., Podorozhny, R., Lei, H.: Dynamic composition and optimization of web services. Distr. Parallel Databases 24, 45–72 (2008)Google Scholar
  370. 370.
    Zhao, W., Hauser, R., Bhattacharya, K., Bryant, B.R., Cao, F.: Compiling business processes: untangling unstructured loops in irreducible flow graphs. Int. J. Web Grid Serv. 2, 68–91 (2006)Google Scholar
  371. 371.
    Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Creating declarative process models using test driven modeling suite. In: CAiSE Forum. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 107, pp. 16–32, pp. 1–8. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  372. 372.
    Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: The impact of testcases on the maintainability of declarative process models. In: Proceedings of the BPMDS/EMMSAD ’11. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 81, pp. 163–177. Springer, Berlin (2011)Google Scholar
  373. 373.
    Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Toward enhanced life-cycle support for declarative processes. J. Software Evol. Process 24(3), 285–302 (2012)Google Scholar
  374. 374.
    zur Muehlen, M., Recker, J.: How much language is enough? Theoretical and practical use of the business process modeling notation. In: CAiSE. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5074, pp. 465–479. Springer, Berlin (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manfred Reichert
    • 1
  • Barbara Weber
    • 2
  1. 1.University of UlmUlmGermany
  2. 2.University of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations