Advertisement

Object-Centered Process Modeling: Principles to Model Data-Intensive Systems

  • Rui Henriques
  • António Rito Silva
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 66)

Abstract

New modeling approaches appeared in the last decade based on the premise that process structures in data-intensive landscapes are pushed by data-driven events. However, since emergent approaches as artifact-centered, data-driven, product-based and document-based modeling cover reduced subsets of all data-related needs, they have a limited practical impact [13]. This work structures the set of requirements to model responsive data-intensive systems, studies the emergent object-centered approaches to retrieve a set of principles and, finally, defines a solution direction, centered in expressive object models and in model transformations, for the support of the introduced principles.

Keywords

process modeling data-intensive system object-orientation 

Topics

Concepts: data- and event-driven BPM Design-time CEP: modeling notations and methods for event-driven BPM LongPaper category 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abiteboul, S., Segoufin, L., Vianu, V.: Modeling and verifying active xml artifacts. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 10–15 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abrahams, A., Eyers, D.: Using annotated policy documents as a user interface for process management. In: ICAS 2007. IEEE CS, DC, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barthelmess, P., Wainer, J.: Workflow systems: a few definitions and a few suggestions. In: COCS 1995, pp. 138–147. ACM, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhattacharya, K., Gerede, C.E., Hull, R., Liu, R., Su, J.: Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In: Alonso, G., Dadam, P., Rosemann, M. (eds.) BPM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4714, pp. 288–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bider, I.: Choosing approach to business process modeling - practical perspective. Journal of Conceptual Modeling (January 2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohn, D., Hull, R.: Business artifacts: A data-centric approach to modeling business operations and processes. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 3–9 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Corradini, F., Polzonetti, A., Pruno, R., Forastieri, L.: Document exchange methodology for collaborative work in e-government. In: DEXA 2006, pp. 283–287. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dietz, J.L.G.: Architecture - Building strategy into design. Academic Service, The Hague (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Domingos, D., Rito Silva, A., Veiga, P.: Workflow access control from a business perspective. In: ICEIS (3), pp. 18–25 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dori, D.: Object-process methodology as a bp modelling tool. In: ECIS 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fritz, C., Hull, R., Su, J.: Automatic construction of simple artifact-based business processes. In: ICDT 2009, pp. 225–238. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guabtni, A., Charoy, F.: Multiple instantiation in a dynamic workflow environment. In: Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 175–188 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Towards object-aware process management systems: Issues, challenges, benefits. In: Enterprise, BP and IS Modeling. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 197–210. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Integrating users in object-aware process management systems: Issues and challenges. In: Rinderle-Ma, Sadiq, Leymann (eds.) BPM Workshops. Lecture Notes in BIP, vol. 43, pp. 29–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Linehan, M.H.: Ontologies and rules in business models. In: EDOCW 2007, pp. 149–156. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu, R., Bhattacharya, K., Wu, F.Y.: Modeling business contexture and behavior using business artifacts. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 324–339. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Merz, M., Liberman, B., Lamersdorf, W.: Using mobile agents to support interorganizational workflow-management. Int. Journal on Applied AI 11(6) (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: Data-driven modeling and coordination of large process structures. In: OTM Conferences (1), pp. 131–149 (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Müller, D., Reichert, M., Herbst, J.: A new paradigm for the enactment and dynamic adaptation of data-driven process structures. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nandi, P., König, D., Moser, S., Hull, R., Klicnik, V., Claussen, S., Kloppmann, M., Vergo, J.: Introducing business entities and the business entity definition language. Technical report, IBM (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rahaman, M., Roudier, Y., Schaad, A.: Document-based dynamic workflows: Towards flexible and stateful services. IEEE Congress on Services, 87–94 (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reijers, H.A., Limam, S., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Product-based workflow design. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. 20(1), 229–262 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sadiq, W., Schulz, K., Orlowska, M.E., Sadiq, S.: When workflows will not deliver: The case of contradicting work practice. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2005, pp. 69–84. Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Poznaniu (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schonenberg, H., Mans, R., Russell, N., Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process flexibility: A survey of contemporary approaches. In: Dietz, J., Albani, A., Barjis, J. (eds.) CIAO! EOMAS. LNBIP, vol. 10, pp. 16–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Truong, H.L., Dustdar, S.: Integrating data for business process management. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 48–53 (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    van Bussel, G., Ector, F., van der Pijl, G., Ribbers, P.: Building the record keeping system: Process improvement triggered by management of archival documents. In: HICSS 2001, vol. 8, p. 8060. IEEE CSociety, Washington, DC, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Barthelmess, P., Ellis, C., Wainer, J.: Workflow modeling using proclets. In: CooplS 2002, pp. 198–209. Springer, London (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Berens, P.: Beyond workflow management: product-driven case handling. In: GROUP 2001, pp. 42–51. ACM, NY (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Mans, R.S., Russell, N.C.: Workflow support using proclets: Divide, interact, and conquer. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 16–22 (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Hee, K.: Workflow Management: Models, Methods, and Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: A new paradigm for business process support. Data and Knowledge Eng. 53 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vanderfeesten, I.T.P., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Product based workflow support: Dynamic workflow execution. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 571–574. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weske, M.: Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus (2007)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Muehlen, M.z.: Volume versus variance: Implications of data-intensive workflows. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32(3), 42–47 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rui Henriques
    • 1
  • António Rito Silva
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Organization and Engineering (CODE) - INESC-IDInstituto Superior Técnico (IST-UTL)LisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options