skip to main content
research-article

Supporting Dynamic Workflows with Automatic Extraction of Goals from BPMN

Published:17 October 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Organizations willing to employ workflow technology have to be prepared to undertake a significant investment of time and effort due to the exceptionally dynamic nature of the business environment. Today, it is unlikely that processes are modeled once to be repeatedly executed without any changes. Goal-oriented dynamic workflows are a promising approach to provide flexibility to the execution of business processes. Many goal-oriented frameworks exist in the literature to be used for the purpose. However, modeling goals is a burden for the business analyst.

This work proposes an automatic approach for extracting goals from a business process for supporting adaptive workflows. The approach consists of a static analysis of the global workflow state. Goals derive from individual BPMN elements and their interactions.

For validating the theory, we developed the BPMN2Goals tool, which has been used for supporting a middleware for self-adaptation.

References

  1. Dhaminda B. Abeywickrama, Nicola Bicocchi, and Franco Zambonelli. 2012. SOTA: Towards a general model for self-adaptive systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE 21st International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE’12). IEEE, 48--53.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Michael Adams. 2010. Dynamic workflow. In Modern Business Process Automation. Springer, 123--145.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Rohit Aggarwal, Kunal Verma, John Miller, and William Milnor. 2004. Constraint driven web service composition in METEOR-S. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Services Computing (SCC’04). IEEE, 23--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Alessandra Agostini and Giorgio De Michelis. 2000. Improving flexibility of workflow management systems. In Business Process Management. Springer, 218--234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. G. H. Alférez, V. Pelechano, R. Mazo, C. Salinesi, and D. Diaz. 2014. Dynamic adaptation of service compositions with variability models. J. Syst. Softw. 91 (May 2014), 24--47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.06.034Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jim Amsden. 2012. Capturing requirements with Business Motivation Model, IBM Rational RequisitePro, and IBM Rational Software Modeler.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Danilo Ardagna, Marco Comuzzi, Enrico Mussi, Barbara Pernici, and Pierluigi Plebani. 2007. Paws: A framework for executing adaptive web-service processes. IEEE Softw. 24, 6 (2007), 39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ahmed Awad, Matthias Weidlich, and Mathias Weske. 2009. Specification, verification and explanation of violation for data aware compliance rules. In Service-Oriented Computing. Springer, 500--515.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Joonsoo Bae, Hyerim Bae, Suk-Ho Kang, and Yeongho Kim. 2004. Automatic control of workflow processes using ECA rules. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 16, 8 (2004), 1010--1023.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Luciano Baresi and Liliana Pasquale. 2010. Adaptive goals for self-adaptive service compositions. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS’10). IEEE, 353--360.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Henry H. Bi and J. Leon Zhao. 2004. Applying propositional logic to workflow verification. Inf. Technol. Manage. 5, 3-4 (2004), 293--318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Julien Bidot, Christos Goumopoulos, and Ioannis Calemis. 2011. Using ai planning and late binding for managing service workflows in intelligent environments. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom’11). IEEE, 156--163.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Paolo Bresciani, Anna Perini, Paolo Giorgini, Fausto Giunchiglia, and John Mylopoulos. 2004. Tropos: An agent-oriented software development methodology. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 8, 3 (2004), 203--236.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Thomas Brihaye, Gilles Geeraerts, Hsi-Ming Ho, Arthur Milchior, and Benjamin Monmege. 2018. Efficient algorithms and tools for MITL model-checking and synthesis. In Proceedings of the 2018 23rd International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS’18). IEEE, 180--184.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Greg Brown, Betty H. C. Cheng, Heather Goldsby, and Ji Zhang. 2006. Goal-oriented specification of adaptation requirements engineering in adaptive systems. In Proceedings of the 2006 International Workshop on Self-adaptation and Self-managing Systems. ACM, 23--29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. P. A. Buhler and J. M. Vidal. 2005. Towards adaptive workflow enactment using multiagent systems. Inf. Technol. Manage. 6, 1 (2005), 61--87.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Christoph Bussler and Stefan Jablonski. 1994. Implementing agent coordination for workflow management systems using active database systems. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Research Issues in Data Engineering 1994. IEEE, 53--59.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Cristina Cabanillas, Manuel Resinas, Antonio Ruiz-Cortés, and Ahmed Awad. 2011. Automatic generation of a data-centered view of business processes. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 352--366.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Gerardo Canfora, Massimiliano Di Penta, Raffaele Esposito, and Maria Luisa Villani. 2005. QoS-aware replanning of composite web services. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS’05). IEEE, 121--129.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Jorge Cardoso. 2005. How to measure the control-flow complexity of web processes and workflows. Workflow Handbook 2005, 199--212.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Fabio Casati, Stefano Ceri, Barbara Pernici, and Giuseppe Pozzi. 1996. Deriving active rules for workflow enactment. In International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications. Springer, 94--115.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. 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
  23. Fabio Casati, Ski Ilnicki, LiJie Jin, Vasudev Krishnamoorthy, and Ming-Chien Shan. 2000. Adaptive and dynamic service composition in eFlow. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 13--31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Michele Chinosi and Alberto Trombetta. 2012. BPMN: An introduction to the standard. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 34, 1 (2012), 124--134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Piotr Chrzastowski-Wachtel, Boualem Benatallah, Rachid Hamadi, Milton O’Dell, and Adi Susanto. 2003. A top-down petri net-based approach for dynamic workflow modeling. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 336--353.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Massimiliano Colombo, Elisabetta Di Nitto, and Marco Mauri. 2006. Scene: A service composition execution environment supporting dynamic changes disciplined through rules. In International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing. Springer, 191--202.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Umeshwar Dayal, Meichun Hsu, and Rivka Ladin. 1990. Organizing long-running activities with triggers and transactions. In ACM SIGMOD Record, Vol. 19. ACM, 204--214.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Jose Luis De la Vara González and J. Sanchez Diaz. 2007. Business process-driven requirements engineering: A goal-based approach. In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Business Process Modeling. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Claudia Di Napoli, Marco Valentino, Luca Sabatucci, and Massimo Cossentino. 2018. Adaptive workflows of home-care services. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 27th International Conference on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE’18). IEEE, 3--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Remco M. Dijkman, Marlon Dumas, and Chun Ouyang. 2008. Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50, 12 (2008), 1281--1294.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ahmed Elkhodary, Naeem Esfahani, and Sam Malek. 2010. FUSION: A framework for engineering self-tuning self-adaptive software systems. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. ACM, 7--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Rik Eshuis and Pieter Van Gorp. 2012. Synthesizing object life cycles from business process models. In International Conference on Conceptual Modeling. Springer, 307--320.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Chiara Di Francescomarino, Chiara Ghidini, Marco Rospocher, Luciano Serafini, and Paolo Tonella. 2011. A framework for the collaborative specification of semantically annotated business processes. J. Softw. Maint. Evol.: Res. Pract. 23, 4 (2011), 261--295.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Christos Goumopoulos, Ioannis Calemis, and Achilles Kameas. 2010. Deployment of adaptive workflows in intelligent environments. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE’10). IEEE, 197--202.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Rachid Hamadi and Boualem Benatallah. 2004. Recovery nets: Towards self-adaptive workflow systems. In International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 439--453.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Yanbo Han, Amit Sheth, and Christoph Bussler. 1998. A taxonomy of adaptive workflow management. In Workshop of the 1998 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. WfMC Workflow Handbook. 2000. Workflow Management Coalition, Lighthouse Point, FL (2000).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Mitra Heravizadeh, Jan Mendling, and Michael Rosemann. 2008. Dimensions of business processes quality (QoBP). In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 80--91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Gabriel Hermosillo, Lionel Seinturier, and Laurence Duchien. 2010. Creating context-adaptive business processes. In International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing. Springer, 228--242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Thomas T. Hildebrandt and Raghava Rao Mukkamala. 2011. Declarative event-based workflow as distributed dynamic condition response graphs. In Programming Language Approaches to Concurrency and Communication-cEntric Software (PLACES’10), EPTCS 69. 59--73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Peter J. Kammer, Gregory Alan Bolcer, Richard N. Taylor, Arthur S. Hitomi, and Mark Bergman. 2000. Techniques for supporting dynamic and adaptive workflow. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 9, 3--4 (2000), 269--292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Raman Kazhamiakin, Marco Pistore, and Marco Roveri. 2004. A framework for integrating business processes and business requirements. In Proceedings of the 8th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC’04). IEEE, 9--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Peter Kueng and Peter Kawalek. 1997. Goal-based business process models: Creation and evaluation. Bus. Process Manage. J. 3, 1 (1997), 17--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Santhosh Kumaran, Rong Liu, and Frederick Y. Wu. 2008. On the duality of information-centric and activity-centric models of business processes. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 32--47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Sotirios Liaskos, Shakil M. Khan, Marin Litoiu, Marina Daoud Jungblut, Vyacheslav Rogozhkin, and John Mylopoulos. 2012. Behavioral adaptation of information systems through goal models. Inf. Syst. 37, 8 (2012), 767--783.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Fu-Ren Lin and Michael J. Shaw. 1998. Reengineering the order fulfillment process in supply chain networks. Int. J. Flex. Manufact. Syst. 10, 3 (1998), 197--229.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Ruopeng Lu, Shazia Sadiq, and Guido Governatori. 2009. On managing business processes variants. Data Knowl. Eng. 68, 7 (2009), 642--664.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Jose F. Mejia Bernal, Paolo Falcarin, Maurizio Morisio, and Jia Dai. 2010. Dynamic context-aware business process: A rule-based approach supported by pattern identification. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. ACM, 470--474.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Milan Milanovic, Dragan Gasevic, and Luis Rocha. 2011. Modeling flexible business processes with business rule patterns. In Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC’11). IEEE, 65--74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. M. Morandini, L. Penserini, and Anna Perini. 2008. Towards goal-oriented development of self-adaptive systems. Proceedings of the 2008 International Workshop on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-managing Systems (2008), 9--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Object Management Group (OMG). 2010. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN 2.0) by Example. Retrieved from https://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?dtc/10-06-02.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Martin Odersky, Lex Spoon, and Bill Venners. 2008. Programming in Scala. Artima Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Martyn A. Ould and M. A. Ould. 1995. Business Processes: Modelling and Analysis for Re-engineering and Improvement. Vol. 598. Wiley Chichester.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Maja Pesic and Wil M. P. Van der Aalst. 2006. A declarative approach for flexible business processes management. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 169--180.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Marco Pistore, Annapaola Marconi, Piergiorgio Bertoli, and Paolo Traverso. 2005. Automated composition of web services by planning at the knowledge level. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’05), Vol. 19. 1252--1259.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Nauman A. Qureshi, Anna Perini, Neil A. Ernst, and John Mylopoulos. 2010. Towards a continuous requirements engineering framework for self-adaptive systems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Requirements@ Run. Time (RE@ RunTime’10). IEEE, 9--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Manfred Reichert and Peter Dadam. 1998. ADEPT flex—supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 10, 2 (1998), 93--129.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Manfred Reichert, Alena Hallerbach, and Thomas Bauer. 2015. Lifecycle management of business process variants. In Handbook on Business Process Management 1. Springer, 251--278.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Manfred Reichert and Barbara Weber. 2012. Enabling Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems: Challenges, Methods, Technologies. Springer Science 8 Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. L. Sabatucci, A. Cavaleri, and M. Cossentino. 2016. Adopting a middleware for self-adaptation in the development of a smart travel system. In Intelligent Interactive Multimedia Systems and Services 2016. Springer, 671--681.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Luca Sabatucci and Massimo Cossentino. 2015. From means-end analysis to proactive means-end reasoning. In Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems. IEEE Press, 2--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Luca Sabatucci and Massimo Cossentino. 2017. Self-adaptive smart spaces by proactive means--end reasoning. J. Reliable Intell. Environ. 3, 3 (2017), 159--175.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Luca Sabatucci, Massimo Cossentino, Giada De Simone, and Salvatore Lopes. 2018. Self-reconfiguration of shipboard power systems. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 3rd International Workshops on Foundations and Applications of Self* Systems (FAS* W’18). IEEE, 124--129.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Luca Sabatucci, Carmelo Lodato, Salvatore Lopes, and Massimo Cossentino. 2013. Towards self-adaptation and evolution in business process. In Proceedings of the Workshop AI Meets Business Processes, Co-Located with the 13th Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AI*IA).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Luca Sabatucci, Salvatore Lopes, and Massimo Cossentino. 2017. Self-configuring cloud application mashup with goals and capabilities. Clust. Comput. 20, 3 (2017), 2047--2063.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Luca Sabatucci, Valeria Seidita, and Massimo Cossentino. 2017. The four types of self-adaptive systems: A metamodel. In International Conference on Intelligent Interactive Multimedia Systems and Services. Springer, 440--450.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Shazia W. Sadiq, Olivera Marjanovic, and Maria E. Orlowska. 2000. Managing change and time in dynamic workflow processes. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 9, 01n02 (2000), 93--116.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Biplav Srivastava and Jana Koehler. 2003. Web service composition-current solutions and open problems. In Proceedings of the ICAPS 2003 Workshop on Planning for Web Services, Vol. 35. 28--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Diane M. Strong and Steven M. Miller. 1995. Exceptions and exception handling in computerized information processes. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 13, 2 (1995), 206--233.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Matthias Thimm. 2014. Tweety: A comprehensive collection of Java libraries for logical aspects of artificial intelligence and knowledge representation. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. AAAI Press, 528--537.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Wil M. P. Van der Aalst. 1998. The application of Petri nets to workflow management. J. Circ. Syst. Comput. 8, 1 (1998), 21--66.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Wil M. P. Van Der Aalst and Arthur H. M. Ter Hofstede. 2000. Verification of workflow task structures: A petri-net-baset approach. Inf. Syst. 25, 1 (2000), 43--69.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  73. Tim Van Eijndhoven, Maria-Eugenia Iacob, and María Laura Ponisio. 2008. Achieving business process flexibility with business rules. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC’08). IEEE, 95--104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Axel Van Lamsweerde, Robert Darimont, and Emmanuel Letier. 1998. Managing conflicts in goal-driven requirements engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 24, 11 (1998), 908--926.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  75. Silvia Von Stackelberg, Susanne Putze, Jutta Mülle, and Klemens Böhm. 2014. Detecting data-flow errors in BPMN 2.0. Open J. Inf. Syst. 1, 2 (2014), 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Ivo Vondrák. 2007. Business process modeling. In Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases XVIII, Marie Duží, Hannu Jaakkola, Yasushi Kiyoki, and Hannu Kangassalo (Eds.). IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 223--235.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Xianghui Wang, Zhiyong Feng, and Keman Huang. 2018. D3L-based service runtime self-adaptation using replanning. In IEEE Access, Vol. 6. 14974--14995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Jon Whittle, Pete Sawyer, Nelly Bencomo, Betty H. C. Cheng, and Jean-Michel Bruel. 2010. RELAX: A language to address uncertainty in self-adaptive systems requirement. Requir. Eng. 15, 2 (2010), 177--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Jennifer Widom and Stefano Ceri. 1996. Active Database Systems: Triggers and Rules for Advanced Database Processing. Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Peter Y. H. Wong and Jeremy Gibbons. 2008. A process semantics for BPMN. In Formal Methods and Software Engineering. Springer, 355--374.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. P. Giorgini Yu, N. Maiden, and J. Mylopoulos. 2011. Social modeling for requirements engineering: An introduction. In Social Modeling for Requirements Engineering, E. Yu, P. Giorgini, N. Maiden, and J. Mylopoulos (Eds.). MIT Press, 3--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Eric S. K. Yu and John Mylopoulus. 1996. Using goals, rules and methods to support reasoning in business process reengineering. Intell. Syst. Account. Finan. Manage. 5, 1 (1996), 1--13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Supporting Dynamic Workflows with Automatic Extraction of Goals from BPMN

        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 Autonomous and Adaptive Systems
          ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems  Volume 14, Issue 2
          June 2019
          137 pages
          ISSN:1556-4665
          EISSN:1556-4703
          DOI:10.1145/3368391
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2019 ACM

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 17 October 2019
          • Accepted: 1 August 2019
          • Revised: 1 July 2019
          • Received: 1 August 2018
          Published in taas Volume 14, Issue 2

          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

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format
        About Cookies On This Site

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

        Learn more

        Got it!