Abstract
In the light of an increasing demand on business process compliance, the verification of process models against compliance rules has become essential in enterprise computing. To be broadly applicable compliance checking has to support data-aware compliance rules as well as to consider data conditions within a process model. Independently of the actual technique applied to accomplish compliance checking, data-awareness means that in addition to the control flow dimension, the data dimension has to be explored during compliance checking. However, naive exploration of the data dimension can lead to state explosion. We address this issue by introducing an abstraction approach in this paper. We show how state explosion can be avoided by conducting compliance checking for an abstract process model and abstract compliance rules. Our abstraction approach can serve as preprocessing step to the actual compliance checking and provides the basis for more efficient application of existing compliance checking algorithms.
This work was done within the research project SeaFlows partially funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Sadiq, S., Governatori, G., Naimiri, K.: Modeling control objectives for business process compliance. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Auditing business process compliance. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Sadiq, S., Orlowska, M., Sadiq, W.: Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Information Systems 30(5), 349–378 (2005)
Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P.: Design and verification of instantiable compliance rule graphs in process-aware information systems. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 9–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Awad, A., Weidlich, M., Weske, M.: Specification, verification and explanation of violation for data aware compliance rules. In: Baresi, L., Chi, C.-H., Suzuki, J. (eds.) ICSOC-ServiceWave 2009. LNCS, vol. 5900, pp. 500–515. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Awad, A., Decker, G., Weske, M.: Efficient compliance checking using BPMN-Q and temporal logic. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 326–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Liu, Y., Müller, S., Xu, K.: A static compliance-checking framework for business process models. IBM Systems Journal 46(2), 335–361 (2007)
Yu, J., et al.: Pattern based property specification and verification for service composition. In: Aberer, K., Peng, Z., Rundensteiner, E.A., Zhang, Y., Li, X. (eds.) WISE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4255, pp. 156–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Foerster, A., Engels, G., Schattkowsky, T.: Activity diagram patterns for modeling quality constraints in business processes. In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 2–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Semantic correctness in adaptive process management systems. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 193–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Weber, I., Hoffmann, J., Mendling, J.: Semantic business process validation. In: Proc. of the 3rd Int’l Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management, pp. 22–36 (2008)
Governatori, G., et al.: Detecting regulatory compliance for business process models through semantic annotations. In: Business Process Management Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 17, pp. 5–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
van der Aalst, W., 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)
Cousot, P., Cousot, R.: Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints. In: Proc. of the 4th ACM Symp. on Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 238–252. ACM Press, New York (1977)
Graf, S., Saidi, H.: Construction of abstract state graphs with PVS. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 72–83. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Das, S.: Predicate Abstraction. PhD thesis, Stanford University (2003)
Model, F.S., Clarke, E., Lu, Y.: Counterexample-guided abstraction refinement. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 154–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Dutertre, B., De Moura, L.: The YICES SMT solver (2006), Tool paper at http://yices.csl.sri.com/tool-paper.pdf
Bensalem, S., et al.: An overview of SAL. In: Proc. of the 5th NASA Langley Formal Methods Workshop, pp. 187–196. NASA Langley Research Center (2000)
Dadam, P., Reichert, M.: The ADEPT project: a decade of research and development for robust and flexible process support. Computer Science-Research and Development 23(2), 81–97 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Knuplesch, D., Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Pfeifer, H., Dadam, P. (2010). On Enabling Data-Aware Compliance Checking of Business Process Models. In: Parsons, J., Saeki, M., Shoval, P., Woo, C., Wand, Y. (eds) Conceptual Modeling – ER 2010. ER 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6412. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16373-9_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16373-9_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16372-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16373-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)