Skip to main content

Hierarchical Declarative Modelling with Refinement and Sub-processes

  • Conference paper
Business Process Management (BPM 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 8659))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We present a new declarative model with composition and hierarchical definition of processes, featuring (a) incremental refinement, (b) adaptation of processes, and (c) dynamic creation of sub-processes. The approach is motivated and exemplified by a recent case management solution delivered by our industry partner Exformatics A/S. The approach is achieved by extending the Dynamic Condition Response (DCR) graph model with interfaces and composition along those interfaces. Both refinement and sub-processes are then constructed in terms of that composition. Sub-processes take the form of hierarchical (complex) events, which dynamically instantiate sub-processes. The extensions are realised and supported by a prototype simulation tool.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., Westergaard, M., Maggi, F.M.: Declare. Webpage (2010), http://www.win.tue.nl/declare/

  2. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Carbone, M., Hildebrandt, T., Perrone, G., Wasowski, A.: Refinement for transition systems with responses. In: FIT. EPTCS, vol. 87, pp. 48–55 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Debois, S.: DCR exploration tool v.6. IT University of Copenhagen (2014), http://www.itu.dk/research/models/wiki/index.php/DCR_Exploration_Tool

  5. Ellson, J., Gansner, E., Koutsofios, L., North, S.C., Woodhull, G.: Graphviz - open source graph drawing tools. In: Mutzel, P., Jünger, M., Leipert, S. (eds.) GD 2001. LNCS, vol. 2265, pp. 483–484. Springer, Heidelberg (2002), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45848-4_57

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Groefsema, H., Bucur, D.: A survey of formal business process verification: From soundness to variability. In: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design, pp. 198–203 (2013), http://www.cs.rug.nl/ds/uploads/pubs/groefsema-bmsd.pdf

  7. Hildebrandt, T., Marquard, M., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T.: Dynamic condition response graphs for trustworthy adaptive case management. In: Demey, Y.T., Panetto, H. (eds.) OTM 2013 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 8186, pp. 166–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R.: Declarative event-based workflow as distributed dynamic condition response graphs. In: PLACES. EPTCS, vol. 69, pp. 59–73 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T.: Nested dynamic condition response graphs. In: Arbab, F., Sirjani, M. (eds.) FSEN 2011. LNCS, vol. 7141, pp. 343–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T.: Safe distribution of declarative processes. In: Barthe, G., Pardo, A., Schneider, G. (eds.) SEFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 7041, pp. 237–252. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Hull, R., et al.: Introducing the guard-stage-milestone approach for specifying business entity lifecycles (Invited talk). In: Bravetti, M. (ed.) WS-FM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6551, pp. 1–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Maggi, F.M., Westergaard, M., Montali, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Runtime verification of LTL-based declarative process models. In: Khurshid, S., Sen, K. (eds.) RV 2011. LNCS, vol. 7186, pp. 131–146. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Montali, M.: Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models. LNBIP, vol. 56. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Mukkamala, R.R.: A Formal Model For Declarative Workflows: Dynamic Condition Response Graphs. Ph.D. thesis, IT University of Copenhagen (June 2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T., Slaats, T.: Towards trustworthy adaptive case management with dynamic condition response graphs. In: EDOC, pp. 127–136. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T.: From dynamic condition response structures to büchi automata. In: TASE, pp. 187–190. IEEE Computer Society (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T., Tøth, J.B.: The resultmaker online consultant: From declarative workflow management in practice to ltl. In: EDOCW, pp. 135–142. IEEE Computer Society (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Object Management Group BPMN Technical Committee: Business Process Model and Notation, version 2.0, http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/PDF

  19. Reijers, H., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.: On the usefulness of subprocesses in business process models. BPM Reports 1003, Eindhoven (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Slaats, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T., Marquard, M.: Exformatics declarative case management workflows as DCR graphs. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 339–354. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Vardi, M.Y.: An automata-theoretic approach to linear temporal logic. In: Moller, F., Birtwistle, G. (eds.) Logics for Concurrency. LNCS, vol. 1043, pp. 238–266. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Winskel, G.: Event structures. In: Brauer, W., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 1986. LNCS, vol. 255, pp. 325–392. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Expressiveness and understandability considerations of hierarchy in declarative business process models. In: Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Wrycza, S. (eds.) BPMDS 2012 and EMMSAD 2012. LNBIP, vol. 113, pp. 167–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Debois, S., Hildebrandt, T., Slaats, T. (2014). Hierarchical Declarative Modelling with Refinement and Sub-processes. In: Sadiq, S., Soffer, P., Völzer, H. (eds) Business Process Management. BPM 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8659. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10172-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10172-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-10171-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-10172-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics