Advertisement

Goal Orchestrations: Modelling and Mining Flexible Business Processes

  • Metta Santipuri
  • Aditya Ghose
  • Hoa Khanh Dam
  • Suman Roy
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10650)

Abstract

In many application domains, it is more natural to think of a process as a coordination model of goals to be achieved rather than of tasks or acitivities to be performed. Replacing tasks or activities with goals in process models allows us to enact processes in flexible, context-sensitive ways. We define a formal semantics for processes modeled in this manner (which we call goal orchestrations) and show how these enable flexible process execution. We also offer a simple means of mining goal orchestrations from readily available event logs, and present an evaluation with an event log consisting of 65000 entries from one of the world’s largest IT companies.

References

  1. 1.
    Allehyani, B., Reiff-Marganiec, S.: Maintaining goals of business processes during runtime reconfigurations. In: Proceedings of the 8th ZEUS Workshop, pp. 21–28 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arkley, P., Riddle, S.: Tailoring traceability information to business needs. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference Requirements Engineering, pp. 239–244. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chopra, S., Ghose, A., Meyer, T.: Non-prioritized ranked belief change. J. Philos. Log. 32(4), 417–443 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cleland-Huang, J., Settimi, R., Duan, C., Zou, X.: Utilizing supporting evidence to improve dynamic requirements traceability. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 135–144. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dalpiaz, F., Cardoso, E., Canobbio, G., Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J.: Social specifications of business processes with azzurra. In: 2015 IEEE 9th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), pp. 7–18, May 2015Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dasgupta, A., Ghose, A.K.: Implementing reactive BDI agents with user-given constraints and objectives. Int. J. Agent-Oriented Softw. Eng. 4(2), 141–154 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Rospocher, M., Serafini, L., Tonella, P.: Semantically-aided business process modeling. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 114–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-04930-9_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Di Pietro, I., Pagliarecci, F., Spalazzi, L.: Model checking semantically annotated services. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 38, 592–608 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ernst, N.A., Mylopoulos, J., Yu, Y., Nguyen, T.: Supporting requirements model evolution throughout the system life-cycle. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering, RE 2008, pp. 321–322. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fensel, D., Facca, F.M., Simperl, E., Toma, I.: Web service modeling ontology. Semantic Web Services, pp. 107–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-19193-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fensel, D., Lausen, H., Polleres, A., de Bruijn, J., Stollberg, M., Roman, D., Domingue, J.: Enabling Semantic Web Services: The Web Service Modeling Ontology. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-34520-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ghose, A., Goebel, R.: Belief states as default theories: studies in non-prioritized belief change. In: ECAI, vol. 98, pp. 8–12 (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Auditing business process compliance. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-74974-5_14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghose, A., Koliadis, G., Chueng, A.: Rapid business process discovery (R-BPD). In: Parent, C., Schewe, K.-D., Storey, V.C., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ER 2007. LNCS, vol. 4801, pp. 391–406. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-75563-0_27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ginsberg, M.L., Smith, D.E.: Reasoning about action I: a possible world approach. Artif. Intell. 35(2), 165–195 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Glorio, O., Pardillo, J., Mazon, J.N., Trujillo, J.: Dawara: an eclipse plugin for using i* on data warehouse requirement analysis. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering, RE 2008, pp. 317–318. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gou, Y., Ghose, A., Chang, C.-F., Dam, H.K., Miller, A.: Semantic monitoring and compensation in socio-technical processes. In: Indulska, M., Purao, S. (eds.) ER 2014. LNCS, vol. 8823, pp. 117–126. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-12256-4_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hayes, J.H., Dekhtyar, A., Sundaram, S.K., Howard, S.: Helping analysts trace requirements: an objective look. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 249–259. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hepp, M., Leymann, F., Domingue, J., Wahler, A., Fensel, D.: Semantic business process management: a vision towards using semantic web services for business process management. In: IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering (ICEBE 2005), pp. 535–540. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hinge, K., Ghose, A., Koliadis, G.: Process SEER: a tool for semantic effect annotation of business process models. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International EDOC Conference (EDOC-2009). IEEE Computer Society Process (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koliadis, G., Ghose, A.: Relating business process models to goal-oriented requirements models in KAOS. In: Hoffmann, A., Kang, B., Richards, D., Tsumoto, S. (eds.) PKAW 2006. LNCS, vol. 4303, pp. 25–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11961239_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Aoki, T., Traichaiyaporn, K., Chiba, Y., Matsubara, M., Nishi, M., Narisawa, F.: Modeling safety requirements of ISO26262 using goal trees and patterns. In: Artho, C., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FTSCS 2015. CCIS, vol. 596, pp. 206–221. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-29510-7_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meyer, T., Ghose, A., Chopra, S.: Social choice, merging, and elections. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds.) ECSQARU 2001. LNCS, vol. 2143, pp. 466–477. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). doi: 10.1007/3-540-44652-4_41CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meyer, T., Ghose, A., Chopra, S.: Syntactic representations of semantic merging operations. In: Ishizuka, M., Sattar, A. (eds.) PRICAI 2002. LNCS, vol. 2417, pp. 620–620. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). doi: 10.1007/3-540-45683-X_88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mirakhorli, M., Fakhry, A., Grechko, A., Wieloch, M., Cleland-Huang, J.: Archie: a tool for detecting, monitoring, and preserving architecturally significant code. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, FSE 2014, New York, NY, USA, pp. 739–742. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Panis, M.C.: Successful deployment of requirements traceability in a commercial engineering organization... really. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 303–307. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Santiputri, M., Ghose, A.K., Dam, H.K.: Mining task post-conditions: automating the acquisition of process semantics. Data Knowl. Eng. 109, 112–125 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Siegl, S., Hielscher, K.S., German, R.: Model based requirements analysis and testing of automotive systems with timed usage models. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pp. 345–350. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Smith, F., Proietti, M.: Rule-based behavioral reasoning on semantic business processes. In: ICAART, SciTePress, pp. 130–143 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Valderas, P., Pelecha, V., Pastor, O., et al.: Requirements engineering for pervasive systems. A transformational approach. In: Null, pp. 351–352. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Van der Aalst, W., Weijters, T., Maruster, L.: Workflow mining: discovering process models from event logs. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 16(9), 1128–1142 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weber, I., Hoffmann, J., Mendling, J.: Beyond soundness: on the verification of semantic business process models. Distrib. Parallel Databases 27, 271–343 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Winslett, M.: Reasoning about action using a possible models approach. Urbana 51, 61801 (1988)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yu, Y., Wang, Y., Mylopoulos, J., Liaskos, S., Lapouchnian, A., do Prado Leite, J.C.S.: Reverse engineering goal models from legacy code. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 363–372. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Metta Santipuri
    • 1
  • Aditya Ghose
    • 1
  • Hoa Khanh Dam
    • 1
  • Suman Roy
    • 2
  1. 1.Decision Systems Lab, School of Computing and Information TechnologyUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia
  2. 2.Infosys Ltd.BangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations