Abstract
A configurable process model captures a family of related process models in a single artifact. Such models are intended to be configured to fit the requirements of specific organizations or projects, leading to individualized process models that are subsequently used for domain analysis or solution design. This article proposes a formal foundation for individualizing configurable process models incrementally, while preserving correctness, both with respect to syntax and behavioral semantics. Specifically, assuming the configurable process model is behaviorally sound, the individualized process models are guaranteed to be sound. The theory is first developed in the context of Petri nets and then extended to a process modeling notation widely used in practice, namely Event-driven Process Chains.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
van der Aalst WMP (1997) Verification of workflow nets. In: Azéma P, Balbo G (eds) Proceedings of the 18th international conference on application and theory of Petri net. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1248. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 407–426
van der Aalst WMP (1999) Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains. Inf Softw Technol 41(10): 639–650
van der Aalst WMP, Basten T (2002) Inheritance of workflows: an approach to tackling problems related to change. Theor Comput Sci 270(1–2): 125–203
Antkiewicz M, Czarnecki K (2004) FeaturePlugIn: feature modeling Plug-In for eclipse. In: Burke MG (eds) Proceedings of the 2004 OOPSLA workshop on eclipse technology eXchange, (ETX 2004). ACM Press, New York, pp 67–72
Abdulla PA, Iyer SP, Nylén A (2004) SAT-solving the coverability problem for Petri nets. Formal Methods Syst Design 24(1): 25–43
van der Aalst WMP, Lassen KB (2008) Translating unstructured workflow processes to readable BPEL: theory and implementation . Inf Softw Technol 50(3): 131–159
Batory DS (2005) Feature models, grammars, and propositional formulas. In: Obbink JH, Pohl K (eds) Proceedings of the 9th international conference on software product lines (SPLC’05). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3714. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 7–20
Becker J, Delfmann P, Knackstedt R (2007) Adaptive reference modeling: integrating configurative and generic adaptation techniques for information models. In: Becker J, Delfmann P (eds) Proceedings of the reference modeling conference (RM’06). Springer, Heodelberg, pp 27–58
Bunke H (2000) Recent developments in graph matching. In: Sanfeliu A, Villanueva JJ, Vanrell M, Alquezar R, Jain AK, Kittler J (eds) Proceedings of the 15th international conference on pattern recognition (ICPR’00), vol 2. IEEE Computer Society, pp 117–124
Czarnecki K, Antkiewicz M (2005) Mapping features to models: a template approach based on superimposed variants. In: Glück R, Lowry MR (eds) Proceedings of the 4th international conference on generative programming and component engineering. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 422–437
Czarnecki K, Helsen S, Eisenecker U (2004) Staged configuration using feature models. In: Nord RL (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on software product lines (SPLC’04). Springer, Heidelberg, pp 266–283
Curran T, Keller G (1997) SAP R/3 business blueprint: understanding the business process reference model. Upper Saddle River
Cortadella J, Kishinevsky M, Lavagno L, Yakovlev A (1998) Deriving Petri nets from finite transition systems. IEEE Trans Comput 47(8): 859–882
Desel J, Esparza J (1995) Free choice Petri nets. Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science, vol 40. Cambridge University Press, London
Estublier J, Casallas R (1994) The adele software configuration manager. In: Configuration management. Wiley, London, pp 99–139
Ehrenfeucht A, Rozenberg G (1989) Partial (Set) 2-Structures—Parts 1 and 2. Acta Inform 27(4): 315–368
Esparza J, Silva M (1990) Circuits, handles, bridges and nets. In: Rozenberg G (eds) Advances in Petri nets. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 483. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 210–242
Gottschalk F, van der Aalst WMP, Jansen-Vullers MH (2007) Configurable process models—a foundational approach. In: Becker J, Delfmann P (eds) Reference modeling. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 59–78
Gottschalk F, van der Aalst WMP, Jansen-Vullers MH, La Rosa M (2008) Configurable workflow models. Int J Coop Inf Syst 17(2): 177–221
Gottschalk F, Wagemakers TAC, Jansen-Vullers MH, van der Aalst WMP, La Rosa M (2009) Configurable process models—experiences from a municipality case study. In: Gordijn J (eds) Proceedings of the 21st international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’09). Springer, Heidelberg
van Hee KM, Oanea O, Sidorova N (2005) Colored Petri nets to verify extended event-driven process chains. In: Meersman R, Tari Z (eds) Proceedings of CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3760. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 183–201
van Hee KM, Oanea O, Serebrenik A, Sidorova N, Voorhoeve M (2008) History-based joins: semantics, soundness and implementation. Data Knowl Eng 64(1): 24–37
Kindler E (2006) On the semantics of EPCs: resolving the vicious circle. Data Knowl Eng 56(1): 23–40
Keller G, Nüttgens M, Scheer A-W (1992) Semantische Prozessmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Processketten (EPK). Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Wirtschaftsinformatik, University of Saarland, Saarbrücken, (in German)
La Rosa M, Dumas M, ter Hofstede AHM, Mendling J, Gottschalk F (2008) Beyond control-flow: extending business process configuration to roles and objects. In: Li Q, Spaccapietra S, Yu E, Olivé A (eds) Proceedings of the 27th international conference on conceptual modeling (ER’08). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5231. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 199–215
La Rosa M, ter Hofstede AHM, Rosemann M, Shortland K (2008) Bringing process to post production. In: Proceedings of the international conference “Creating value: between commerce and commons”. Queensland University of Technology
La Rosa M, Lux J, Seidel S, Dumas M, ter Hofstede AHM (2007) Questionnaire-driven configuration of reference process models. In: Krogstie J, Opdahl AL, Sindre G (eds) Proceedings of the 19th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’07). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4495. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 424–438
Langner P, Schneider C, Wehler J (1998) Petri net based certification of event driven process chains. In: Desel J, Silva M (eds) Application and theory of Petri nets of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1420. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 286–305
Mendling J, van der Aalst WMP (2007) Formalization and verification of EPCs with OR-Joins based on state and context. In: Krogstie J, Opdahl AL, Sindre G (eds) Proceedings of the 19th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE’07). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4495. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 439–453
Mendling J, van Dongen BF, van der Aalst WMP (2008) Getting Rid of OR-joins and multiple start events in business process models. Enterprise Information Systems. Special Issue on EDOC 2007 Best Papers 2(4): 403–419
Minato S, Ishiura N, Yajima S (1990) Shared binary decision diagram with attributed edges for efficient boolean function manipulation. In: Smith RC (eds) Proceedings of the 27th ACM/IEEE design automation conference. ACM Press, New York, pp 52–57
Murata T (1989) Petri nets: properties, analysis and applications. Proc IEEE 77(4): 541–580
Nüttgens M, Rump FJ (2002) Syntax und Semantik Ereignisgesteuerter Prozessketten (EPK). In: Desel J, Weske M (eds) Proceedings of promise. Lecture Notes in Informatics, vol 21. GI, pp 64–77
Ouyang C, Dumas M, van der Aalst WMP, ter Hofstede AHM, Mendling J (2009) From business process models to process-oriented software systems: the BPMN to BPEL way. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol (forthcoming)
Pohl K, Böckle G, van der Linden F (2005) Software product-line engineering—foundations, principles and techniques. Springer, Heidelberg
Rosemann M, van der Aalst WMP (2007) A configurable reference modelling language. Inf Syst 32(1): 1–23
Razavian M, Khosravi R (2008) Modeling variability in business process models using UML. In: Latifi S (ed) Proceedings of the 5th international conference on information technology: new generations (ITGN’08), pp 82–87
Sarshar K, Loos P (2005a) Comparing the control-flow of EPC and Petri net from the end-user perspective. In: van der Aalst WMP, Benatallah B, Casati F (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on business process management (BPM’05). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3649. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 434–439
Sadiq SW, Orlowska ME, Sadiq W (2005) Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Inf Syst 30(5): 349–378
Schnieders A, Puhlmann F (2006) Variability mechanisms in E-Business process families. In: Abramowicz W, Mayr HC (eds) Proceedings of the 9th international conference on business information systems (BIS’06). LNI, vol 85. GI, pp 583–601
Stephens S (2001) The supply chain council and the supply chain operations reference model. Supply Chain Manag An Int J 1(1): 9–13
Turkay E, Gokhale AS, Natarajan B (2004) Addressing the middleware configuration challenges using model-based techniques. In: Yoo S-M, Etzkorn LH (eds) Proceedings of the 42nd ACM southeast regional conference. ACM Press, New York, pp 166–170
Verbeek HMW, Basten T, van der Aalst WMP (2001) Diagnosing workflow processes using woflan. Comput J 44(4): 246–279
Open Access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
J.L. Fiadeiro, P. Inverardi and T.S.E. Maibaum
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Dumas, M., Gottschalk, F. et al. Preserving correctness during business process model configuration. Form Asp Comp 22, 459–482 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0112-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0112-0