Abstract
Graphically represented Business Process Models (BPMs) are common artifacts in documentation as well as in early phases of (software) development processes. The Graphical Computation Tree Logic (G-CTL) is a notation to define formal graphical validation rules on the same level of abstraction as the BPMs, allowing to specify high-level requirements regarding the content level of the BPMs. The research tool Business Application Modeler (BAM) enables the automatic validation of BPMs with G-CTL rules. While details of the validation procedure are hidden from the user, the checking results need to be presented adequately. In this contribution, we present and discuss methods for visualization and analysis of the checking results in the context of G-CTL based validations. We elaborate how artifacts, which are generated during a validation procedure, may be used to derive different visualizations, and we show how these methods can be combined into more expressive visualizations.
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
Notes
- 1.
G-CTL is not intended to check for syntactical or semantic issues (e.g. deadlocks).
- 2.
The model checker we currently use is the Cadence Symbolic Model Verifier [11].
- 3.
For grayscale prints: In the BPM and mouseover box: The elements with label S1.0 are highlighted in a blue box. S6.0 and S8.0 in a red box. In the rule, the border of the upper pattern is colored magenta, the box of the lower pattern is red.
References
Awad, A., Weidlich, M., Weske, M.: Visually specifying compliance rules and explaining their violations for business processes. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 22(1), 30–55 (2011)
Borrego, D., Eshuis, R., Gómez-López, M.T., Gasca, R.M.: Diagnosing correctness of semantic workflow models. Data Knowl. Eng. 87, 167–184 (2013)
Bräuer, S., Delfmann, P., Dietrich, H.A., Steinhorst, M.: Using a generic model query approach to allow for process model compliance checking – an algorithmic perspective. In: 2013 Proceedings of the Wirtschaftsinformatik (2013)
Copty, Fady, Irron, Amitai, Weissberg, Osnat, Kropp, Nathan, Kamhi, Gila: Efficient debugging in a formal verification environment. In: Margaria, Tiziana, Melham, Thomas F. (eds.) CHARME 2001. LNCS, vol. 2144, pp. 275–292. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
van Dongen, Boudewijn F., de Medeiros, Ana Karla Alves, Verbeek, HMW(Eric), Weijters, AJMMTon, van der Aalst, Wil M.P.: The ProM framework: a new era in process mining tool support. In: Ciardo, Gianfranco, Darondeau, Philippe (eds.) ICATPN 2005. LNCS, vol. 3536, pp. 444–454. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Dwyer, M.B., Avrunin, G.S., Corbett, J.C.: Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 411–420. ACM (1999)
Feja, S., Fötsch, D.: Model Checking with Graphical Validation Rules. In: International Conference on the Engineering of Computer-Based Systems. pp. 117–125. IEEE Computer Society (2008)
Feja, S., Witt, S., Speck, A.: BAM: a requirements validation and verification framework for business process models. In: 11th International Conference on Quality Software, pp. 186–191. IEEE Computer Society (2011)
Goldsby, Heather J., Cheng, Betty H.C., Konrad, Sascha, Kamdoum, Stephane: A visualization framework for the modeling and formal analysis of high assurance systems. In: Wang, Jilin, Whittle, Jon, Harel, David, Reggio, Gianna (eds.) MoDELS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4199, pp. 707–721. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Keller, G., Nüttgens, M., Scheer, A.W.: Semantische Prozessmodellierung auf der Grundlage Ereignisgesteuerter Prozessketten (EPK). Technical report Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik Universität Saarbrücken, Saarbrücken (1992)
McMillan, K.: Cadence SMV and other downloads from Cadence Berkeley Labs. Technical reports, Cadence Berkeley Labs (2012)
Mendling, J.: Metric for Process Models-Empirical Foundations of Verification, Error Prediction, and Guidelines for Correctness. Springer, Berlin (2008)
Nayak, P.P., Williams, B.C.: Fast Context Switching in Real-Time Propositional Reasoning, pp. 50–56. AAAI Press (1997)
Pecheur, Charles, Simmons, Reid G.: From livingstone to SMV. In: Rash, James L., Rouff, Christopher A., Truszkowski, Walt, Gordon, Diana F., Hinchey, Michael G. (eds.) FAABS 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1871, pp. 103–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Prinz, Thomas M., Spieß, Norbert, Amme, Wolfram: A first step towards a compiler for business processes. In: Cohen, Albert (ed.) CC 2014 (ETAPS). LNCS, vol. 8409, pp. 238–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Simmons, R., Pecheur, C., Srinivasan, G.: Towards automatic verification of autonomous systems. In: International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1410–1415 (2000)
Witt, S., Feja, S., Speck, A., Hadler, C.: Business application modeler: a process model validation and verification tool. In: Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 333–334 (2014)
Witt, S., Feja, S., Speck, A.: Applying pattern-based graphical validation rules to business process models. In: IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Validation Workshops, pp. 274–283. IEEE Computer Society (2014)
Witt, S., Feja, S., Speck, A., Prietz, C.: Integrated privacy modeling and validation for business process models. In: Proceedings of the 2012 Joint EDBT/ICDT Workshops, pp. 196–205. ACM (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Witt, S., Feja, S., Hadler, C., Speck, A., Pulvermüller, E. (2015). Visualization of Checking Results for Graphical Validation Rules. In: Fujita, H., Guizzi, G. (eds) Intelligent Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques. SoMeT 2015. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 532. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22689-7_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22689-7_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22688-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22689-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)