Abstract
This paper discusses a specification and merge operation over submodels of a given Process Model (PM) in Design and Engineering Methodology for Organizations (DEMO). In general, a submodel is a part of a given model. An earlier work proposed how submodels of a given DEMO Construction Model (CM) can be attained by a set-theoretic formalization. However, it remains unclear how to expand the formalism to the notion of submodels of a given PM. Since the given PM should align with the corresponding CM, a submodel of the given PM should not only be a PM, but also conform to the corresponding submodel of the CM. These two independent constraints indicate the desired definition and formalization of submodels of PMs. The proposed approach is shown to be applicable to a common demonstration case. Through the formalization, this paper shows the closure, commutativity, and associativity of the merge operation over submodels of a given PM. Moreover, it is found that the consistency between CMs and PMs is preserved during the merge operation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
[4] assumes that there is only one initiator for each transaction kind.
- 2.
When the formalization is expanded to the standard transaction pattern, \(\mathbb {I}\) equals \(\left\{ \mathsf {rq},\mathsf {pm},\mathsf {ex},\mathsf {st},\mathsf {ac},\mathsf {dc},\mathsf {qt},\mathsf {rj},\mathsf {sp}\right\} \).
- 3.
Although it is possible to impose more constraints such as “a wait condition must bridge two distinct transaction kinds”, we aim for fidelity to the metamodel.
References
Dietz, J.L., Hoogervorst, J.A., Albani, A., Aveiro, D., Babkin, E., Barjis, J., Caetano, A., Huysmans, P., Iijima, J., van Kervel, S.J., Mulder, H., Op’t Land, M., Proper, H.A., Sanz, J., Terlouw, L., Tribolet, J., Verelst, J., Winter, R.: The discipline of enterprise engineering. Int. J. Organisational Design Eng. 3(1), 86–114 (2013)
Dietz, J.L.G.: Enterprise Ontology: Theory and Methodology. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Seligmann, P., Wijers, G., Sol, H.: Analyzing the structure of IS methodologies - an alternative approach. In: Maes, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the First Dutch Conference on Information Systems, Amersfoort, pp. 1–28 (1989)
Suga, T., Iijima, J.: Does ‘Merging DEMO Models’ satisfy the associative law? - Validation of partial models and merge operation. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, Lisbon, vol. 2, pp. 467–478. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications (2015)
Dietz, J.L.G.: DEMO specification language (version 3.3, November 2015) (2015). http://www.ee-institute.org/download.php?id=165&type=doc. Accessed 15 Jan 2017
Dietz, J.L.G.: The DELTA theory - understanding systems. Technical report TR-FIT-15-05, Czech Technical University in Prague (2015)
Barjis, J.: Automatic business process analysis and simulation based on DEMO. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 1(4), 365–381 (2007)
Fatyani, T., Iijima, J., Park, J.: Transformation of DEMO model into coloured petri net: Ontology based simulation. In: 6th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development, KEOD 2014, Italy, pp. 388–396. SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.) (2014)
Wang, Y.: Transformation of DEMO models into exchangeable format. Master’s thesis, Delft University of Technology (2009)
Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by Program for Leading Graduate Schools “Academy for Co-creative Education of Environment and Energy Science”, MEXT, Japan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix: Proofs
Appendix: Proofs
Proof of Proposition 1 . Suppose \(\left\langle T,V,W\right\rangle \) is an arbitrary member of the family of sub-TPS-nets \(\wp \left( \left\langle T^{\circ },V^{\circ },W^{\circ }\right\rangle \right) \). Considering that \(\left\langle T^{\circ },V^{\circ },W^{\circ }\right\rangle \) is a PSD, for any \(t_{i}\) and \(t_{j}\) in \(T^{\circ }\), if \(f_{Tname}\left( t_{i}\right) =f_{Tname}\left( t_{j}\right) \) then \(t_{i}=t_{j}\). Now that \(T\subseteq T^{\circ }\) by Definition 9, for any \(t_{i}\) and \(t_{j}\) in \(T\subseteq T^{\circ }\), if \(f_{Tname}\left( t_{i}\right) =f_{Tname}\left( t_{j}\right) \) then \(t_{i}=t_{j}\).
Proof of Theorem 3 . Since \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \) and \(\left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) are members of the family of sub-PSDs of a given PSD \(\left\langle T^{\circ },V^{\circ },W^{\circ }\right\rangle \), we have \(T_{X}\subseteq T^{\circ }\), \(T_{Y}\subseteq T^{\circ }\), \(V_{X}\subseteq V^{\circ }\), \(V_{Y}\subseteq V^{\circ }\), \(W_{X}\subseteq W^{\circ }\), and \(W_{Y}\subseteq W^{\circ }\) by Definition 9. Then, because \(T_{X}\cup T_{Y}\subseteq T^{\circ }\), \(V_{X}\cup V_{Y}\subseteq V^{\circ }\), and \(W_{X}\cup W_{Y}\in W^{\circ }\) hold, it is obvious with Definition 14 that \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \sqcup \left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) is a sub-TPS-net of \(\left\langle T^{\circ },V^{\circ },W^{\circ }\right\rangle \). Next, for any \(\left( \left( t,i\right) ,t^{\prime }\right) \) in \(V_{X}\cup V_{Y}\), if \(\left( \left( t,i\right) ,t^{\prime }\right) \) is in \(V_{X}\) [resp. \(V_{Y}\)], \(t\in T_{X}\) and \(t^{\prime }\in T_{X}\) [resp. \(t\in T_{Y}\) and \(t^{\prime }\in T_{Y}\)] holds, hence \(t\in T_{X}\cup T_{Y}\) and \(t^{\prime }\in T_{X}\cup T_{Y}\). Thus, any \(\left( \left( t,i\right) ,t^{\prime }\right) \) in \(V_{X}\cup V_{Y}\) satisfies the second property of Definition 10. Similarly, any \(\left( \left( t,i\right) ,\left( t^{\prime },i^{\prime }\right) \right) \) in \(W_{X}\cup W_{Y}\) satisfies the second property of Definition 10. Note that the first property of Definition 10 is satisfied by Proposition 1 because \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \sqcup \left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) is a TPS-net. Hence, \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \sqcup \left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) is a PSD. Therefore, by Definition 12, \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \sqcup \left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) is a sub-TPS-net of \(\left\langle T^{\circ },V^{\circ },W^{\circ }\right\rangle \) and a PSD, thus a sub-PSD of the given PSD \(\left\langle T^{\circ },V^{\circ },W^{\circ }\right\rangle \).
Proof of Theorem 4 . The commutativity and associativity of merge operation \(\sqcup \) are obvious from those of set-theoretic union of sets.
Proof of Theorem 5 . Since \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \) is matched to \(\left\langle \mathcal {A}_{X},\mathcal {T}_{X}\right\rangle \) and \(\left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) is matched to \(\left\langle \mathcal {A}_{Y},\mathcal {T}_{Y}\right\rangle \), Definition 13 gives \(\mathcal {T}_{X}=T_{X}\), \(\mathcal {T}_{Y}=T_{Y}\), “\({\forall t,t^{\prime }\in \mathcal {T}_{X},}{(\exists a\in \mathcal {A}_{X},}{f_{ex}\left( t\right) =a=f_{in}\left( t^{\prime }\right) )}\iff {(\exists i\in \mathbb {I},}{\left( \left( t,i\right) ,t^{\prime }\right) \in V_{X})}\)”, and “\({\forall t,t^{\prime }\in \mathcal {T}_{Y},}{(\exists a\in \mathcal {A}_{Y},}{f_{ex}\left( t\right) =a=f_{in}\left( t^{\prime }\right) )}\iff {(\exists i\in \mathbb {I},}{\left( \left( t,i\right) ,t^{\prime }\right) \in V_{Y})}\)”. Thus, \({\mathcal {T}_{X}\cup \mathcal {T}_{Y}}{=T_{X}\cup T_{Y}}\). It also holds that \({\forall t,t^{\prime }\in \mathcal {T}_{X}\cup \mathcal {T}_{Y},}{(\exists a\in \mathcal {A}_{X}\cup \mathcal {A}_{Y},}{f_{ex}\left( t\right) =a=f_{in}\left( t^{\prime }\right) )}\iff {(\exists i\in \mathbb {I},}{\left( \left( t,i\right) ,t^{\prime }\right) \in V_{X}\cup V_{Y})}\). Therefore, by Definition 13, the PSD of \(\left\langle T_{X},V_{X},W_{X}\right\rangle \sqcup \left\langle T_{Y},V_{Y},W_{Y}\right\rangle \) is matched to the OCD \(\left\langle \mathcal {A}_{X},\mathcal {T}_{X}\right\rangle \nabla \left\langle \mathcal {A}_{Y},\mathcal {T}_{Y}\right\rangle \).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Suga, T., Iijima, J. (2017). Formal Specification of DEMO Process Model and Its Submodel. In: Aveiro, D., Pergl, R., Guizzardi, G., Almeida, J., Magalhães, R., Lekkerkerk, H. (eds) Advances in Enterprise Engineering XI. EEWC 2017. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 284. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57955-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57955-9_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57954-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57955-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)