Extensible Canonical Process Model Synthesis Applying Formal Interpretation
The current period of IT development is characterized by an explosive growth of diverse information representation languages. Applying integration and composition of heterogeneous information components it is required to develop the canonical information model serving for adequate expression of semantics of various information models used in the environment encompassing required heterogeneous components. Basic principles of the canonical model synthesis include fixing of its kernel, constructing the kernel extensions for each specific information model of the environment so that this extension together with the kernel could be refined by this information model, and forming the canonical model as a union of all such extensions. Previously these principles have been successfully applied to the synthesis of structural and object canonical models. This paper applies this technique to synthesis of the process canonical model. The method proposed is based on interpretation of process model semantics in logics, and specifically, in the Abstract Machine Notation that made possible to construct provable refinements of process specifications. This method has been applied to the environment of process models defined by workflow patterns classified by W.M.P. van der Aalst. Thus the canonical process model synthesized possesses a property of completeness with respect to broad class of process models used in various Workflow Management Systems as well as the languages used for process composition of Web services.
KeywordsGeneralize Substitution Canonical Model Model Synthesis Input Place Output Place
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: YAWL: Yet Another Workflow Language (Revised version). – QUT Technical report, FIT-TR-2003-04, Brisbane (2003)Google Scholar
- 3.Abrial, J.-R.: B-Technology. Technical overview. – BP International Ltd (1992)Google Scholar
- 7.Butler, M.: csp2B: A Practical Approach to Combining CSP and B. Formal Aspects of Computing 12 (2000)Google Scholar
- 8.Butler, M., Snook, C.: Verifying Dynamic Properties of UML Models by Translation to the B Language and Toolkit. In: Proc. of the UML 2000 Workshop Dynamic Behaviour in UML Models: Semantic QuestionsGoogle Scholar
- 10.Jensen, K.: Coloured Petri Nets: a High Level Language for System Design and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)Google Scholar
- 11.Kalinichenko, L.A.: Data model transformation method based on axiomatic data model extension. In: Proc. of the 4th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (1978)Google Scholar
- 12.Kalinichenko, L.A.: Methods and tools for equivalent data model mapping construction. In: Bancilhon, F., Tsichritzis, D.C., Thanos, C. (eds.) EDBT 1990. LNCS, vol. 416. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)Google Scholar
- 13.Kalinichenko, L.A.: SYNTHESIS: the language for desription, design and programming of the heterogeneous interoperable information resource environment, Moscow (1995)Google Scholar
- 14.Kalinichenko, L.A.: Method for Data Models Integration in the Common Paradigm. In: Proc. of the First East-European Conference, ADBIS 1997, St.Petersburg (1997)Google Scholar
- 15.Kalinichenko, L.A.: Workflow Reuse and Semantic Interoperation Issues. In: Dogac, A., Kalinichenko, L., Ozsu, M.T., Sheth, A. (eds.) Advances in workflow management systems and interoperability. NATO Advanced Study Institute (1997)Google Scholar
- 16.Kalinichenko, L.A., Stupnikov, S.A., Zemtsov, N.A.: Canonical models synthesis for heterogeneous information sources integration, Moscow (2005)Google Scholar
- 18.Stupnikov, S.A., Kalinichenko, L.A., Dong, J.S.: Applying CSP-like Workflow Process Specifications for their Refinement in AMN by Pre- existing Workflows. In: Manolopoulos, Y., Návrat, P. (eds.) ADBIS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2435. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar