skip to main content
research-article

Reasoning About Property Preservation in Adaptive Case Management

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 January 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Adaptive Case Management (ACM) has emerged as a key BPM technology for supporting the unstructured business process. A key problem in ACM is that case schemas need to be changed to best fit the case at hand. Such changes are ad hoc, and may result in schemas that do not reflect the intended logic or properties. This article presents a formal approach for reasoning about which properties of a case schema are preserved after a modification, and describes change operations that are guaranteed to preserve certain properties. The approach supports reasoning about rollbacks. The Case Management model used here is a variant of the Guard-Stage-Milestone model for declarative business artifacts. A real-life example illustrates applicability.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. Francesco Belardinelli, Alessio Lomuscio, and Fabio Patrizi. 2012. Verification of GSM-based artifact-centric systems through finite abstraction. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC). Springer, 17--31. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Kamal Bhattacharya, Cagdas Evren Gerede, Richard Hull, Rong Liu, and Jianwen Su. 2007. Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Business Process Management (BPM). Springer, 288--304. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. BizAgi and others. 2014. Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN), v1. OMG Document Number formal/2014-05-05, Object Management Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Richard Hull, and Jianwen Su. 2009. Artifact-centric workflow dominance. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC). Springer, 130--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Fabio Casati, Stefano Ceri, Barbara Pernici, and Giuseppe Pozzi. 1998. Workflow evolution. Data Knowl. Eng. 24, 3 (1998), 211--238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. David Cohn and Richard Hull. 2009. Business artifacts: A data-centric approach to modeling business operations and processes. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32, 3 (2009), 3--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Elio Damaggio, Richard Hull, and Roman Vaculín. 2013. On the equivalence of incremental and fixpoint semantics for business artifacts with guard-stage-milestone lifecycles. Inf. Syst. 38 (2013), 561--584. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Alin Deutsch, Richard Hull, Fabio Patrizi, and Victor Vianu. 2009. Automatic verification of data-centric business processes. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT). ACM, 252--267. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Claudio Di Ciccio, Andrea Marrella, and Alessandro Russo. 2015. Knowledge-intensive processes: Characteristics, requirements and analysis of contemporary approaches. J. Data Semantics 4, 1 (2015), 29--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Rik Eshuis, Richard Hull, Yutian Sun, and Roman Vaculín. 2014. Splitting GSM schemas: A framework for outsourcing of declarative artifact systems. Inf. Syst. 46 (2014), 157--187. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Rik Eshuis, Richard Hull, and Mengfei Yi. 2015. Property preservation in adaptive case management. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC). Springer, 285--302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Florian Gottschalk, Wil M. P. van der Aalst, Monique H. Jansen-Vullers, and Marcello La Rosa. 2008. Configurable workflow models. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 17, 2 (2008), 177--221.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Alena Hallerbach, Thomas Bauer, and Manfred Reichert. 2010. Capturing variability in business process models: The Provop approach. J. Software Maint. 22, 6--7 (2010), 519--546. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Thomas T. Hildebrandt, Raghava Rao Mukkamala, and Tijs Slaats. 2011. Designing a cross-organizational case management system using dynamic condition response graphs. In Proc. Int. Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC). IEEE Computer Society, 161--170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Sebastian Huber, Adrian Hauptmann, Matthias Lederer, and Matthias Kurz. 2013. Managing complexity in adaptive case management. In Proc. S-BPM ONE 2013. Springer, 209--226.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Richard Hull, Elio Damaggio, Fabiana Fournier, Manmohan Gupta, Fenno Terry Heath, Stacy Hobson, Mark H. Linehan, Sridhar Maradugu, Anil Nigam, Piyawadee Sukaviriya, and Roman Vaculín. 2010. Introducing the guard-stage-milestone approach for specifying business entity lifecycles. In Proc. of the 7th Int. Workshop on Web Services and Formal Methods, WS-FM. Springer, 1--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Richard Hull, Nanjangud C. Narendra, and Anil Nigam. 2009. Facilitating workflow interoperation using artifact-centric hubs. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC). Springer, 1--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Vera Künzle and Manfred Reichert. 2011. PHILharmonicFlows: Towards a framework for object-aware process management. J. Software Maint. 23, 4 (2011), 205--244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Lior Limonad, David Boaz, Richard Hull, Roman Vaculín, and Fenno (Terry) Heath. 2012. A generic business artifacts based authorization framework for cross-enterprise collaboration. In SRII Global Conf. IEEE Computer Society, 70--79. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Andreas Meyer, Luise Pufahl, Dirk Fahland, and Mathias Weske. 2013. Modeling and enacting complex data dependencies in business processes. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Business Process Management (BPM). Springer, 171--186. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Hamid R. Motahari Nezhad, Claudio Bartolini, Sven Graupner, and Susan Spence. 2012. Adaptive case management in the social enterprise. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC). Springer, 550--557. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hamid R. Motahari Nezhad and Keith D. Swenson. 2013. Adaptive case management: Overview and research challenges. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Business Informatics CBI 2013. IEEE Computer Society, 264--269. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Raghava Rao Mukkamala, Thomas T. Hildebrandt, and Tijs Slaats. 2013. Towards trustworthy adaptive case management with dynamic condition response graphs. In Proc. Int. Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conf. (EDOC). IEEE Computer Society, 127--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Anil Nigam and Nathan S. Caswell. 2003. Business artifacts: An approach to operational specification. IBM Syst. J. 42, 3 (2003), 428--445. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Manfred Reichert and Peter Dadam. 1998. ADEPT<sub>flex</sub>-supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 10, 2 (1998), 93--129. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Stefanie Rinderle, Manfred Reichert, and Peter Dadam. 2004. Correctness criteria for dynamic changes in workflow systems—A survey. Data Knowl. Eng. 50, 1 (2004), 9--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Wil M. P. van der Aalst, Mathias Weske, and Dolf Grünbauer. 2005. Case handling: A new paradigm for business process support. Data Knowl. Eng. 53, 2 (2005), 129--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Barbara Weber, Manfred Reichert, and Stefanie Rinderle-Ma. 2008. Change patterns and change support features—Enhancing flexibility in process-aware information systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 66, 3 (2008), 438--466. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Reasoning About Property Preservation in Adaptive Case Management

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Internet Technology
      ACM Transactions on Internet Technology  Volume 19, Issue 1
      Regular Papers, Special Issue on Service Management for IOT and Special Issue on Knowledge-Driven BPM
      February 2019
      321 pages
      ISSN:1533-5399
      EISSN:1557-6051
      DOI:10.1145/3283809
      • Editor:
      • Ling Liu
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 January 2019
      • Accepted: 1 December 2017
      • Revised: 1 October 2017
      • Received: 1 November 2016
      Published in toit Volume 19, Issue 1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!