Skip to main content

Precise vs. Ultra-Light Activity Diagrams - An Experimental Assessment in the Context of Business Process Modelling

  • Conference paper
Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 6759))

Abstract

UML activity diagrams are a commonly used notation for modelling business processes in the field of both workflow automation and requirements engineering. In this paper, we present a novel precise style for this notation. Further, the effectiveness of this style has been investigated in the context of the modelling of business processes through a controlled experiment conducted with master students in Computer Science at the Free University of Bolzano-Bozen. The results indicate that the subjects achieved a significantly better comprehension level when business processes are modelled using the precise style with respect to a “lighter” variant, with no significant impact on the effort to accomplish the tasks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aversano, L., De Lucia, A., Gaeta, M., Ritrovato, P., Stefanucci, S., Villani, M.L.: Managing coordination and cooperation in distributed software processes: the genesis environment. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 9(4), 239–263 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bandinelli, S., Di Nitto, E., Fuggetta, A.: Supporting cooperation in the spade-1 environment. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 22, 841–865 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Basili, V., Shull, F., Lanubile, F.: Building knowledge through families of experiments. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 25(4), 456–473 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Coman, I.D., Sillitti, A.: An empirical exporatory study on inferring developpers’ activities from low-level data. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge, pp. 15–18. Knowledge Systems Institute Graduate School (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cugola, G., Di Nitto, E., Fuggetta, A.: The jedi event-based infrastructure and its application to the development of the opss wfms. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 27, 827–850 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. De Lucia, A., Francese, R., Scanniello, G., Tortora, G.: Distributed workflow management based on UML and web services. In: Encyclopedia of E-Commerce, E-Government, and Mobile Commerce, pp. 217–222. IGI Global (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  7. De Lucia, A., Francese, R., Tortora, G.: Deriving workflow enactment rules from uml activity diagrams: a case study. In: Symposium on Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environments, pp. 211–218 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eriksson, H.E., Penker, M.: Business Modelling with UML. Wiley Computing Publishing, Chichester (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gonzalez, J.D., Diaz, J.S.: Business process-driven requirements engineering: a goal-based approach. In: Proc. of the 8th Workshop on Business Process Modeling Development and Support, pp. 1–9. Tapir Academic Press, London (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gross, A., Doerr, J.: EPC vs. UML activity diagram - two experiments examining their usefulness for requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 47–56. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Heimann, P., Joeris, G., Krapp, C., Westfechtel, B.: Dynamite: Dynamic task nets for software process management. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 331–341 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jurack, S., Lambers, L., Mehner, K., Taentzer, G., Wierse, G.: Object flow definition for refined activity diagrams. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 49–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Juristo, N., Moreno, A.: Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2001)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Marshall, C.: Enterprise modelling with UML: Designing successful software through business analysis. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Monfared, R., West, A., Harrison, R., Weston, R.: An implementation of the business process modelling approach in the automotive industry. Journal of Engineering Manufacture 216(11), 1413–1428 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nitto, E.D., Lavazza, L., Schiavoni, M., Tracanella, E., Trombetta, M.: Deriving executable process descriptions from UML. In: Proceedings of the 22rd International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 155–165 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Business, O.: process model and notation (BPMN) Version 2.0. OMG Final Adopted Specification, Object Management Group (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. OMG. Object constraint language (OCL) specification, version 2.2. Technical report, Object Management Group (February 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. OMG. Unified modeling language (UML) specification, version 2.3. Technical report, Object Management Group (May 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Peixoto, D., Batista, V., Atayde, A., Borges, E., Resende, R., Pádua, C.: A Comparison of BPMN and UML 2.0 Activity Diagrams. In: VII Simposio Brasileiro de Qualidade de Software (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ricca, F., Di Penta, M., Torchiano, M., Tonella, P., Ceccato, M.: The role of experience and ability in comprehension tasks supported by uml stereotypes. In: 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2007), Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2007, May 20-26, pp. 375–384 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Scheer, A.: ARIS-business process modeling. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Torchiano, M., Ricca, F., Tonella, P.: Empirical comparison of graphical and annotation-based re-documentation approaches. IET Software 4(1), 15–31 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering - An Introduction. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2000)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Di Cerbo, F., Dodero, G., Reggio, G., Ricca, F., Scanniello, G. (2011). Precise vs. Ultra-Light Activity Diagrams - An Experimental Assessment in the Context of Business Process Modelling. In: Caivano, D., Oivo, M., Baldassarre, M.T., Visaggio, G. (eds) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6759. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21843-9_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21843-9_23

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-21842-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-21843-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics