Reasoning on UML Data-Centric Business Process Models

  • Montserrat Estañol
  • Maria-Ribera Sancho
  • Ernest Teniente
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8274)


Verifying the correctness of data-centric business process models is important to prevent errors from reaching the service that is offered to the customer. Although the semantic correctness of these models has been studied in detail, existing works deal with models defined in low-level languages (e.g. logic), which are complex and difficult to understand. This paper provides a way to reason semantically on data-centric business process models specified from a high-level and technology-independent perspective using UML.


Business Process Class Diagram Integrity Constraint Activity Diagram Database Schema 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., Calvanese, D., Montali, M., De Giacomo, G., De Masellis, R., Felli, P.: Description logic knowledge and action bases. J. Artif. Intell. Res (JAIR) 46, 651–686 (2013)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagheri Hariri, B., et al.: Verification of relational data-centric dynamic systems with external services. In: PODS, pp. 163–174. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Montali, M., Santoso, A.: Ontology-based governance of data-aware processes. In: Krötzsch, M., Straccia, U. (eds.) RR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7497, pp. 25–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Choppy, C., Klai, K., Zidani, H.: Formal verification of UML state diagrams: a Petri net based approach. ACM SIGSOFT Soft. Eng. Notes 36(1), 1–8 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Damaggio, E., Deutsch, A., Vianu, V.: Artifact systems with data dependencies and arithmetic. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 37(3), 1–36 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eshuis, R.: Symbolic model checking of UML activity diagrams. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 15(1), 1–38 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Estañol, M., Queralt, A., Sancho, M.-R., Teniente, E.: Artifact-centric business process models in UML. In: Yao, S.B., Weldon, J.L., Navathe, S., Kunii, T.L. (eds.) Data Base Design Techniques 1978. LNCS, vol. 132, pp. 292–303. Springer, Heidelberg (1982)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gerede, C.E., Su, J.: Specification and verification of artifact behaviors in business process models. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 181–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lucas, F.J., Molina, F., Álvarez, J.A.T.: A systematic review of UML model consistency management. Information & Software Technology 51(12), 1631–1645 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Queralt, A., Teniente, E.: Reasoning on UML conceptual schemas with operations. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 47–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Queralt, A., Teniente, E.: Verification and validation of UML conceptual schemas with OCL constraints. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 21(2), 13 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Teorey, T., Lightstone, S., Nadeau, T.: Database Modeling and Design, 4th edn. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Montserrat Estañol
    • 1
  • Maria-Ribera Sancho
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ernest Teniente
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Barcelona Supercomputing CenterBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations