Abstract
In this paper, we take technical and practical steps towards the modularisation of compliant-by-design executable declarative process models. First, we demonstrate by example how the specific language of timed DCR graphs is capable of modelling complex legislation, with examples from laws regulating the functioning of local governments in Denmark. We then identify examples of law paragraphs that are beyond these modelling capabilities. This incompatibility arises from subtle and—from a computer science perspective—non-standard interactions between distinct paragraphs of the law, which must then become similar interactions between model fragments. To encompass these situations, we propose a notion of networks of processes, where the processes are allowed to interact and regulate their interaction through the novel mechanisms of exclusion and linking. Networks are parametric in the underlying process formalism, allowing interactions between processes specified in arbitrary and possibly distinct trace-language semantics formalisms as the individual models. Technically, we provide a sufficient condition for a good class of network compositions to realise refinement of the constituent processes. Finally, parts of the theoretical framework (networks and exclusion) have been implemented by our industry partners, and we report on a preliminary evaluation suggesting that inter-model synchronisation is indeed both necessary and helpful in practical modelling scenarios.
Keywords
T. T. Hildebrandt—work supported by the Innovation Fund Denmark project EcoKnow (7050-00034A), the Danish Council for Independent Research project Hybrid Business Process Management Technologies (DFF-6111-00337), and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement BehAPI No. 778233.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Bekendtgørelse af lov om social service, Børne- og Socialministeriet (August 2017)
van der Aa, H., Di Ciccio, C., Leopold, H., Reijers, H.A.: Extracting declarative process models from natural language. In: Giorgini, P., Weber, B. (eds.) CAiSE 2019. LNCS, vol. 11483, pp. 365–382. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21290-2_23
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). https://doi.org/10.1007/11841197_1
Andaloussi, A.A.: Evaluation of DCR networks: Interview recordings and full analysis (February 2020). http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3724874
Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Deep models, normative reasoning and legal expert systems, pp. 37–45. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, USA (1989)
Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Coenen, F.P.: Isomorphism and legal knowledge based systems. Artif. Intell. Law 1(1), 65–86 (1992)
Bench-Capon, T., et al.: A history of AI and Law in 50 papers: 25 years of the international conference on AI and Law. Art. Intell. Law 20(3), 215–319 (2012)
Bugliesi, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P.: Modularity in logic programming. J. Log. Program. 19–20, 443–502 (1994)
Charmaz, K.: Constructing Grounded Theory. Introducing Qualitative Methods series. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2014)
Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Riguzzi, F., Sebastianis, M., Storari, S.: Checking compliance of execution traces to business rules. In: Ardagna, D., Mecella, M., Yang, J. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNBIP, vol. 17. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00328-8_13
Debois, S., Hildebrandt, T.T., Slaats, T.: Replication, refinement & reachability: complexity in dynamic condition-response graphs. Acta Informatica 55(6), 489–520 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00236-017-0303-8
Dragoni, M., Villata, S., Rizzi, W., Governatori, G.: Combining natural language processing approaches for rule extraction from legal documents. In: Pagallo, U., Palmirani, M., Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Villata, S. (eds.) AICOL 2015, AICOL 2016, AICOL 2016, AICOL 2017, AICOL 2017. LNCS, vol. 10791. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00178-0_19
Eberle, H., Unger, T., Leymann, F.: Process fragments. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5870. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05148-7_29
Gordon, T.F., Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Rules and norms: requirements for rule interchange languages in the legal domain. In: Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2009. LNCS, vol. 5858. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04985-9_26
Governatori, G., Sadiq, S.: The journey to business process compliance. IGI Global (2009)
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Norm compliance in business process modeling. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2010. LNCS, vol. 6403. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16289-3_17
Hashmi, M., Governatori, G., Wynn, M.T.: Normative requirements for business process compliance. In: Davis, J., Demirkan, H., Motahari-Nezhad, H. (eds.) ASSRI 2013. LNBIP, vol. 177. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07950-9_8
Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R.: Declarative Event-Based Workflow as Distributed Dynamic Condition Response Graphs. PLACES 69, 59–73 (2010). EPTCS
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). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24690-6_17
Hildebrandt, T.T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T., Zanitti, F.: Contracts for cross-organizational workflows as timed dynamic condition response graphs. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 82(5–7), 164–185 (2013)
Hoare, C.A.R.: Communicating sequential processes. Commun. ACM 21(8), 666–677 (1978)
Holfter, A., Haarmann, S., Pufahl, L., Weske, M.: Checking compliance in data-driven case management. In: Di Francescomarino, C., Dijkman, R., Zdun, U. (eds.) BPM 2019. LNBIP, vol. 362. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37453-2_33
Kindler, E., Petrucci, L.: Towards a standard for modular Petri Nets: a formalisation. In: Franceschinis, G., Wolf, K. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5606. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02424-5_5
Lohmann, N.: Compliance by design for artifact-centric business processes. Inf. Syst. 38(4), 606–618 (2013)
López, H.A., Debois, S., Slaats, T., Hildebrandt, T.T.: Business process compliance using reference models of law. In: Wehrheim, H., Cabot, J. (eds.) FASE 2020. LNCS, vol. 12076. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45234-6_19
López, H.A., Marquard, M., Muttenthaler, L., Strømsted, R.: Assisted declarative process creation from natural language descriptions. In: EDOC Workshops, pp. 96–99. IEEE (2019)
National Social Appeals Board (Ankestyrelsen): Annual report for the 2018 case process (May 2019). https://ast.dk/publikationer/arsopgorelse-2018
National Social Appeals Board (Ankestyrelsen): Appeals Board decisions on the Services Act in Q2 to Q4 2018 (...) (May 2019). https://bit.ly/3glQOBK
Object Management Group BPMN Technical Committee: Business Process Model and Notation, Version 2.0 (2013)
Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., Van der Aalst, W.: DECLARE: full support for loosely-structured processes. In: EDOC, p. 287 (October 2007)
Slaats, T., Schunselaar, D.M.M., Maggi, F.M., Reijers, H.A.: The semantics of hybrid process models. In: Debruyne, C., et al. (eds.) OTM 2016. LNCS, vol. 10033. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48472-3_32
Debois, S.: Formalisation: Modular Process Models for the Law (June 2019). https://www.itu.dk/people/debois/thys/ifm20
The Danish Ministry of Social Affairs and the Interior: Consolidation Act on Social Services (September 2015). http://english.sm.dk/media/14900/consolidation-act-on-social-services.pdf. Executive Order no. 1053
Slaats, T., Debois, S., Hildebrandt, T.: Open to change: a theory for iterative test-driven modelling. In: Weske, M., Montali, M., Weber, I., vom Brocke, J. (eds.) BPM 2018. LNCS, vol. 11080, pp. 31–47. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98648-7_3
Winter, K., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Deriving and combining mixed graphs from regulatory documents based on constraint relations. In: Giorgini, P., Weber, B. (eds.) CAiSE 2019. LNCS, vol. 11483, pp. 430–445. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21290-2_27
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge helpful discussions with Nicklas Healy of Syddjurs Municipality.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Debois, S., López, H.A., Slaats, T., Andaloussi, A.A., Hildebrandt, T.T. (2020). Chain of Events: Modular Process Models for the Law. In: Dongol, B., Troubitsyna, E. (eds) Integrated Formal Methods. IFM 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12546. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63461-2_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63461-2_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-63460-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-63461-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)