Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

PSL: A semantic domain for flow models

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Software & Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Flow models underlie popular programming languages and many graphical behavior specification tools. However, their semantics is typically ambiguous, causing miscommunication between modelers and unexpected implementation results. This article introduces a way to disambiguate common flow modeling constructs, by expressing their semantics as constraints on runtime sequences of behavior execution. It also shows that reduced ambiguity enables more powerful modeling abstractions, such as partial behavior specifications. The runtime representation considered in this paper uses the Process Specification Language (PSL), which is defined in first-order logic, making it amenable to automated reasoning. The activity diagrams of the Unified Modeling Language are used for example flow models.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Action Semantics Submission Team (2000) Action Semantics for the UML. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/2000-08-02

  2. Bock C (2003) UML 2 Activity and Action Models. Journal of Object Technology 2:4, July–August. http://www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2003_07/column3

  3. Ciocoiu M, Gruninger M, Nau D (2001) Ontologies for Integrating Engineering Applications. Journal of Computing and Information Science and Engineering 1(1):12–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Comon Logic Working Group (2003) Common Logic Standard. http://cl.tamu.edu, http://cl.tamu.edu

  5. Fox MS (1992) The TOVE Project: A Common-sense Model of the Enterprise, Industrial and Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems. In: Belli F, Radermacher FJ (eds) Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence # 604, Springer-Verlag, pp 25–34

  6. Fox MS, Gruninger M (1998) Enterprise Modelling. AI Magazine, AAAI Press, pp 109–121, Fall

  7. Ghallab M, Howe A, Knoblock C, McDermott D, Ram A, Veloso M, Daniel W, Wilkins D (1998) PDDL: The Planning Domain Definition Language v.2. Technical Report CVC TR-98-003, Yale Center for Computational Vision and Control

  8. Genesereth MR, Fikes R (1992) Knowledge Interchange Format 3.0. Technical Report KSL-92-01, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University

  9. Gruninger M (2003) Guide to the Ontology of the Process Specification Language. In: Staab S (ed) Handbook of Ontologies in Information Systems, Springer-Verlag

  10. Gruninger M (2003) PSL 2.0 Ontology – Current Theories and Extensions. http://www.nist.gov/psl/psl-ontology/

  11. Gruninger M (2004) Model Theory of PSL-Core. To appear in Technical Report of the Institute for Systems Research at the University of Maryland, College Park

  12. Gruninger M, Menzel C (2003) Process Specification Language: Principles and Applications. AI Magazine 24(3):63–74

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hayes P, Menzel C (2001) A Semantics for the Knowledge Interchange Format. Workshop on the IEEE Standard Upper Ontology, IJCAI, Seattle

  14. Hendler J, McGuinness DL (2001) DARPA Agent Markup Language. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 15:72–73

  15. Kalman J (2001) Automated reasoning with Otter. Rinton Press, Princeton

  16. Karp R, Miller R (1966) Properties of a Model for Parallel Computations: Determinacy, Termination, Queueing. SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics 14(6):1390–1411, November

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Kiczales G, des Rivieres J, Bobrow D (1991) The Art of the Metaobject Protocol. MIT Press

  18. Peterson J (1981) Petri Net Theory and the Modelling of Systems. Prentice-Hall

  19. Levesque H, Reiter R, Lesperance Y, Lin F, Scherl R (1997) GOLOG: A logic programming language for dynamic domains. Journal of Logic Programming 31:92–128

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Marti-Oliet N, Meseguer J (1991) From Petri Nets to Linear Logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 1(1):69–101

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. McCarthy J, Hayes P (1969) Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In: Meltzer B, Michie D (eds) Machine Intelligence 4, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp 463–502

  22. McIlraith S, Son TC, Zeng H (2001) Semantic Web Services. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on the Semantic Web 16:46–53, March/April

    Google Scholar 

  23. Menzel C, Gruninger M (2001) A formal foundation for process modeling. In: Welty C, Smith B (eds) Formal Ontology in Information Systems, ACM Press

  24. Nau D (2003) Mapping and merging ontologies. In: Staab S (ed) Handbook of Ontologies in Information Systems, Springer-Verlag

  25. Object Management Group (2003) OCL 2.0 Specification. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/03-10-14, March

  26. Object Management Group (2003) OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification, version 1.5, Part 6. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/03-03-01, March

  27. Object Management Group (2004) UML 2.0 Superstructure Specificatoin. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/03-08-02, March

  28. Reiter R (2001) Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schlenoff C, Knutilla A, Ray S (1997) Requirements for Modeling Manufacturing Process: A New Perspective. In: Proceedings of Design Engineering Conferences, Sacremento, September

  30. Unambiguous UML Submission Team (2003) Unambiguous UML (2U) 3rd Revised Submission to UML 2 Infrastructure RFP. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/2003-01-07

  31. Workflow Management Coalition (1999) Workflow Standard – Interoperability Abstract Specification. http://www.wfmc.org/standards/docs/TC-1012_Nov_99.pdf, November

  32. Workflow Management Coalition (1999) Interface 1: Process Definition Interchange Process Model. Technical Report WfMC-TC-1016-P. http://www.wfmc.org/standards/docs.htm

  33. Wyner GM, Lee J (2003) Defining Specialization for Process Models. In: Malone TW, Crowston K, Herman GA (eds) Organizing Business Knowledge: The MIT Process Handbook, MIT Press, pp 131–174

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899-8263, USA

    Conrad Bock

  2. Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA

    Michael Gruninger

Authors
  1. Conrad Bock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Gruninger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Conrad Bock.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bock, C., Gruninger, M. PSL: A semantic domain for flow models. Softw Syst Model 4, 209–231 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-004-0066-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-004-0066-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation