Compliance by Design for Artifact-Centric Business Processes
Compliance to legal regulations, internal policies, or best practices is becoming a more and more important aspect in business processes management. Compliance requirements are usually formulated in a set of rules that can be checked during or after the execution of the business process, called compliance by detection. If noncompliant behavior is detected, the business process needs to be redesigned. Alternatively, the rules can be already taken into account while modeling the business process to result in a business process that is compliant by design. This technique has the advantage that a subsequent verification of compliance is not required.
This paper focuses on compliance by design and employs an artifact-centric approach. In this school of thought, business processes are not described as a sequence of tasks to be performed (i.e., imperatively), but from the point of view of the artifacts that are manipulated during the process (i.e., declaratively). We extend the artifact-centric approach to model compliance rules and show how compliant business processes can be synthesized automatically.
KeywordsBusiness Process Model Check Goal State Regular Language Business Process Management
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Awad, A.: BPMN-Q: a language to query business processes. In: EMISA 2007. LNI P-119, pp. 115–128. GI (2007)Google Scholar
- 4.Ben-Ari, M., Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of branching time. In: POPL 1981, pp. 164–176. ACM, New York (1981)Google Scholar
- 6.Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
- 7.Cortadella, J., Kishinevsky, M., Kondratyev, A., Lavagno, L., Yakovlev, A.: Petrify: A tool for manipulating concurrent specifications and synthesis of asynchronous controllers. Trans. Inf. and Syst. E80-D(3), 315–325 (1997)Google Scholar
- 8.Dwyer, M.B., Avrunin, G.S., Corbett, J.C.: Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: ICSE 1999, pp. 411–420. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
- 9.Fahland, D., Favre, C., Jobstmann, B., Koehler, J., Lohmann, N., Völzer, H., Wolf, K.: Instantaneous soundness checking of industrial business process models. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 278–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Havelund, K., Roşu, G.: Testing linear temporal logic formulae on finite execution traces. Technical Report 01.08, RIACS (2001)Google Scholar
- 19.OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN). Version 2.0, Object Management Group (2011), http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0
- 21.Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: FOCS 1977, pp. 46–57. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1977)Google Scholar
- 25.Sackmann, S., Kähmer, M., Gilliot, M., Lowis, L.: A classification model for automating compliance. In: CEC/EEE 2008, pp. 79–86. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar