Abstract
An Adaptive Process Management System (APMS) allows for flexible, dynamic and even ad hoc adaptation of business processes based on case data, context and events. It is also important that APMS technology ensure error-free process execution and compliance with semantic constraints. However, most process design tools tend to be rigid or they handle only syntactic constraints. This restricts their value in real-world applications considerably. This paper presents a new approach to validate process change operations against semantic constraints using an integer programming formulation. The formulation allows us to describe existential as well as coordination (such as before-after ordering sequence) relationships between tasks in a process in a common way. It can then be solved to not only check full or strong compliance, but also determine the minimum set of additional process changes required to ensure weak compliance. Notions of strong and weak compliance are discussed and illustrated with a detailed example. We argue that this approach is more elegant and superior to a pure logic based approach.
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 subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bae, J., et al.: Automatic control of workflow processes using ECA rules. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 16, 1010–1023 (2004)
Ly, L., et al.: On enabling integrated process compliance with semantic constraints in process management systems. Information Systems Frontiers (2009)
Blaser, R., et al.: Improving pathway compliance and clinician performance by using information technology. International Journal of Medical Informatics 76, 151–156 (2007)
OMG: Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) Version 1.0. OMG Final Adopted Specification. Object Management Group (2006)
Kumar, A., Yao, W.: Process Materialization Using Templates and Rules to Design Flexible Process Models. In: Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2009. LNCS, vol. 5858, pp. 122–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Müller, R., Greiner, U., Rahm, E.: Agentwork: a workflow system supporting rule-based workflow adaptation. Data & Knowledge Engineering 51, 223–256 (2004)
jBoss: Drools, http://jboss.org/drools/
Reaction RuleML, http://reaction.ruleml.org
Paschke, A., Kozlenkov, A.: Rule-Based Event Processing and Reaction Rules. In: Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (eds.) RuleML 2009. LNCS, vol. 5858, pp. 53–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Paschke, A., Kozlenkov, A., Boley, H.: A homogenous reaction rule language for complex event processing. In: Proc. 2nd International Workshop on Event Drive Architecture and Event Processing Systems, EDA-PS 2007 (2007)
Paschke, A.: ECA-RuleML: An Approach combining ECA Rules with temporal interval-based KR Event/Action Logics and Transactional Update Logics. Arxiv preprint cs/0610167 (2006)
Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Change patterns and change support features-enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. DKE 66, 438–466 (2008)
Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Integration and verification of semantic constraints in adaptive process management systems. Data & Knowledge Engineering 64, 3–23 (2008)
Lu, R., Sadiq, S., Governatori, G.: On managing business processes variants. Data & Knowledge Engineering 68, 642–664 (2009)
Berkelaar, M., Eikland, K., Notebaert, P.: lp solve
Chiu, D.K.W., Li, Q., Karlapalem, K.: A meta modeling approach to workflow management systems supporting exception handling* 1. Information Systems 24, 159–184 (1999)
Hagen, C., Alonso, G.: Exception handling in workflow management systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26, 943–958 (2000)
Luo, Z., et al.: Exception handling in workflow systems. Applied Intelligence 13, 125–147 (2000)
Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPT flex—supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 10, 93–129 (1998)
Weber, B., Wild, W., Breu, R.: CBRFlow: Enabling adaptive workflow management through conversational case-based reasoning. In: Funk, P., González Calero, P.A. (eds.) ECCBR 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3155, pp. 89–101. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data & Knowledge Engineering 53, 129–162 (2005)
Schonenberg, M.H., et al.: Towards a taxonomy of process flexibility (extended version). BPM Center Report BPM-07-11, BPMcenter. org. (2007)
Sadiq, S.W., Orlowska, M.E., Sadiq, W.: Specification and validation of process constraints for flexible workflows. Information Systems 30, 349–378 (2005)
van der Aalst, W., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balancing between flexibility and support. Computer Science - Research and Development 23, 99–113 (2009)
W3C: Rule Interchange Format, RIF (2010), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-overview/
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
Kumar, A., Yao, W., Chu, CH., Li, Z. (2010). Ensuring Compliance with Semantic Constraints in Process Adaptation with Rule-Based Event Processing. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds) Semantic Web Rules. RuleML 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6403. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16289-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16289-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16288-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16289-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)