Abstract
The DMN standard allows users to build declarative models of their decision knowledge. The standard aims at being simple enough to allow business users to construct these models themselves, without help from IT staff. To this end, it combines simple decision tables with a clear visual notation. However, for real-life applications, DMN sometimes proves too restrictive. In this paper, we develop an extension to DMN’s decision table notation, which allows more knowledge to be expressed, while retaining the simplicity of DMN. We demonstrate our new notation on a real-life case study on product design.
This work is supported by the Flemish Agency for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, TETRA HBC.2017.0039 and R&D project HBC.2017.0417.
M. Deryck and B. Aerts—Joint primary author.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
OMG: Decision Model and Notation 1.2 (2018)
Aerts, B., Vennekens, J.: Application of logic-based methods to machine component design. In: Technical Communications of the 34th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2018) (2018)
Calvanese, D., Dumas, M., Laurson, Ü., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Teinemaa, I.: Semantics and analysis of DMN decision tables. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 217–233. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_13
De Cat, B., Bogaerts, B., Bruynooghe, M., Janssens, G., Denecker, M.: Predicate logic as a modeling language: the IDP system, pp. 279–323 (2018)
Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24605-3_37
de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24
Feldman, J.: Representing and solving rule-based decision models with constraint solvers. In: Olken, F., Palmirani, M., Sottara, D. (eds.) RuleML 2011. LNCS, vol. 7018, pp. 208–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24908-2_23
Calvanese, D., Dumas, M., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M.: Semantic DMN: formalizing decision models with domain knowledge. In: Costantini, S., Franconi, E., Van Woensel, W., Kontchakov, R., Sadri, F., Roman, D. (eds.) RuleML+RR 2017. LNCS, vol. 10364, pp. 70–86. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61252-2_6
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Deryck, M., Aerts, B., Vennekens, J. (2019). Adding Constraint Tables to the DMN Standard: Preliminary Results. In: Fodor, P., Montali, M., Calvanese, D., Roman, D. (eds) Rules and Reasoning. RuleML+RR 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11784. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31095-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31095-0_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31094-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31095-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)