Advertisement

A Tool for Animating BPMN Token Flow

  • Thomas Allweyer
  • Stefan Schweitzer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 125)

Abstract

The concept of tokens flowing through a process model is very useful for explaining and understanding the meaning and the execution semantics of a BPMN model. This paper presents a software tool for animating the token flow of arbitrary process models. It can handle different scenarios of gateway combinations, loops, expanded and attached sub-processes, untyped start and end events, as well as terminating end events. It is possible to show several process instances within the same model. They are represented as differently colored tokens.

Keywords

Animation BPMN E-Learning Execution Semantics Sequence Flow Token Flow 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    OMG (ed.): Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0. OMG document number: formal/2011-01-03 (2011), http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/PDF
  2. 2.
    Allweyer, T.: BPMN 2.0. Introduction to the Standard for Business Process Modeling. BoD, Norderstedt (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Briol, P.: BPMN 2.0 Distilled. Lulu, Raleigh (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Freund, J., Rücker, B.: Praxishandbuch BPMN 2.0, 3rd edn. Hanser, Munich Vienna (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    White, S.A., Miers, D.: BPMN Modeling and Reference Guide. Future Strategies, Lighthouse Point (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dive Into Business Process Management, http://www.diveintobpm.org
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Ouyang, C., et al.: Workflow Management. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1, pp. 387–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dugan, L., Palmer, N.: Making a BPMN 2.0 Model Executable. In: Fischer, L. (ed.) BPMN 2.0 Handbook, 2nd edn., pp. 71–91. Future Strategies, Lighthouse Point (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    van der Aalst, W., et al.: Business Process Simulation. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1, pp. 313–338. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Januszczak, J.: Simulation for Business Process Management. In: Fischer, L. (ed.) BPMN 2.0 Handbook, 2nd edn., pp. 135–150. Future Strategies, Lighthouse Point (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Waller, A., Clark, M., Enston, L.: L-SIM: Simulating BPMN Diagrams with a Purpose Built Engine. In: Perrone, L.F., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2006 Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 591–597. IEEE, Piscataway (2006), http://www.informs-sim.org/wsc06papers/073.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    L-SIM Server for Business Process Simulation, http://www.lanner.com/en/l-sim.cfm
  18. 18.
    Silver, B.: BPMN Method & Style, 2nd edn. Cody-Cassidy Press, Aptos (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Dongen, B.F., Jansen-Vullers, M., Verbeek, H.M.W.E., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of the SAP reference models using EPC reduction, state-space analysis, and invariants. Comput. Ind. 58(6), 578–601 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mendling, J.: Empirical Studies in Process Model Verification. In: Jensen, K., van der Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency II. LNCS, vol. 5460, pp. 208–224. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fahland, D., Favre, C., Jobstmann, B., Koehler, J., Lohmann, N., Völzer, H., Wolf, K.: Instantaneous Soundness Checking of Industrial Business Process Models. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 278–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    van Gorp, P., Dijkman, R.: BPMN 2.0 Execution Semantics Formalized as Graph Rewrite Rules: extended version. Beta Working Paper series 353. Eindhoven University of Technology (2011), http://cms.ieis.tue.nl/Beta/Files/WorkingPapers/wp_353.pdf
  24. 24.
    Sörensen, O.: Semantics of Joins in Cyclic BPMN Workflows. Diploma Thesis. Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel (2009), http://www.is.informatik.uni-kiel.de/~ove/research/papers/2009-OrJoin.pdf
  25. 25.
    zur Muehlen, M., Recker, J.: How Much Language Is Enough? Theoretical and Practical Use of the Business Process Modeling Notation. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 465–479. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Signavio Process Editor, http://www.signavio.com

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Allweyer
    • 1
  • Stefan Schweitzer
    • 1
  1. 1.Fachbereich Informatik und MikrosystemtechnikFachhochschule KaiserslauternZweibrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations