Advertisement

Applying Graph Reduction Techniques for Identifying Structural Conflicts in Process Models

  • Wasim Sadiq
  • Maria E. Orlowska
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1626)

Abstract

The foundation of a process model lies in its control flow specifications. Using a generic process modeling language for workflows, we show how a control flow specification may contain certain structural conflicts that could compromise its correct execution. In general, identification of such conflicts is a computationally complex problem and requires development of effective algorithms specific for target system language. We present a visual verification approach and algorithm that employs a set of graph reduction rules to identify structural conflicts in process models for a generic workflow modeling language. We also provide insights into the correctness and complexity of the reduction process. The main contribution of the paper is a new technique for satisfying well-defined correctness criteria in process models.

Keywords

Current Node Incoming Flow Reduction Rule Multiple Flow Split Structure 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Aalst. WMP van der (1997). Verification of Workflow Nets. In P. Azema and G. Balbo, editors, Application and Theory of Petri Nets 1997, volume 1248 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 407–426. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aalst. WMP van der (1998). The Application of Petri Nets to Workflow Management. The Journal of Circuits, Systems and Computers, 8(1):21–66, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Butler Report. Workflow: Integrating the Enterprise. The Butler Group, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reichert M and Dadam P (1997). ADEPTflex–Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflow without loosing control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems (JIIS), Special Issue on Workflow and Process Management.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carlsen S (1997). Conceptual Modeling and Composition of Flexible Workflow Models. PhD Thesis. Department of Computer Science and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway, 1997.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Casati F, Ceri S, Pernici B and Pozzi G (1995). Conceptual Modeling of Workflows. In M.P. Papazoglou, editor, Proceedings of the 14th In-ternational Object-Oriented and Entity-Relationship Modeling Conference, volume 1021 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 341–354. Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ellis CA and Nutt GJ (1999). Modelling and Enactment of Workflow Systems. In M. Ajmone Marasan, editor, Application and Theory of Petri Nets, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 691, pages 1–16, Springer-Verleg, Berlin, 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Georgakopoulos D, Hornick M and Sheth A (1995) An Overview of Workflow Management: From Process Modeling to Workflow Automation Infrastructure. Journal on Distributed and Parallel Databases, 3(2):119–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hofstede, AHM ter, Orlowska ME and Rajapakse J (1998). Verification Problems in Conceptual Workflow Specifications. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 24(3):239–256, January 1998.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kuo D, Lawley M, Liu C and Orlowska ME (1996). A General Model for Nested Transactional Workflow. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Advanced Transaction Models and Architecture (ATMA'96), Bombay India, pp.18–35, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rajapakse J (1996). On Conceptual Workflow Specification and Verification. MSc Thesis. Department of Computer Science, The University of Queensland, Australia, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sadiq W and Orlowska ME (1997). On Correctness Issues in Conceptual Modeling of Workflows. In Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS ‘97), Cork, Ireland, June 19–21, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sadiq W and Orlowska ME (1999). On Capturing Process Requirements of Workflow Based Information Systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Business Information Systems (BIS ‘99), Poznan, Poland, April 14–16, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Workflow Management Coalition (1996) The Workflow Management Coalition Specifications–Terminology and Glossary. Issue 2.0, Document Number WFMC-TC-1011.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Workflow Management Coalition (1998). Interface 1: Process Definition Interchange, Process Model, Document Number WfMC TC-1016-P.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wasim Sadiq
    • 1
  • Maria E. Orlowska
    • 1
  1. 1.Distributed Systems Technology Centre Department of Computer Science & Electrical EngineeringThe University of QueenslandQldAustralia

Personalised recommendations