Abstract
In this tutorial, we compare OWL-DL reasoning and Petri net analysis for validating refinement and grounding of business processes.
(1) Process refinement: Like in software engineering, the implementation of a business process involves different interacting roles, such as business expert, analyst, process architect, and developer. Each role designs and refines different abstractions of the process until it is sufficiently refined. It is important to verify that the process models of the different abstractions are consistent.
(2) Process grounding: A sufficiently refined process has to be mapped on existing IT systems. Ideally, IT systems consist of components with a semantic annotation of their behavior. The most specific process must respect all IT systems’ behaviors. Formally capturing process semantics enables to check automatically for consistent process refinement and grounding.
The classic application of semantic techniques in the area of static models is well understood. The analysis of business processes deals with dynamics. Modeling dynamics is a challenge for current approaches of semantic Web services. We compare advantages and shortcomings of Petri net analysis and description logic (DL) reasoning for refinement and grounding validation.
This work has been funded by the European Commission within the 7th Framework Programme project MOST no. ICT-2008-216691, http://most-project.eu .
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003) ISBN 0-521-78176-0
Curran, T.A., Ladd, T., Ladd, A.: SAP R/3 Business Blueprint: Understanding Enterprise Supply Chain Management, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall International, Englewood Cliffs (1999)
Esparza, J.: Decidability and complexity of petri net problems - an introduction. In: Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 1998. LNCS, vol. 1491, pp. 374–428. Springer, Heidelberg (1998) ISBN 3-540-65306-6
Esparza, J., Nielsen, M.: Decidability issues for petri nets - a survey. Bulletin of the EATCS 52, 244–262 (1994)
Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Motik, B., Sattler, U. (eds.): Proceedings of the DL Home 22nd International Workshop on Description Logics (DL 2009), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Oxford, UK, July 27-30, vol. 477. CEUR-WS.org (2009)
Gutwenger, C., Mutzel, P.: A linear time implementation of spqr-trees. In: Marks, J. (ed.) GD 2000. LNCS, vol. 1984, pp. 77–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Heineman, G.T., Councill, W.T.: Component-Based Software Engineering: Putting the Pieces Together, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2001)
Hopcroft, J.E., Tarjan, R.E.: Dividing a graph into triconnected components. SIAM J. Comput. 2(3), 135–158 (1973)
Johnson, R., Pearson, D., Pingali, K.: The program structure tree: Computing control regions in linear time, pp. 171–185. ACM Press, New York (1994)
Karp, R.M., Miller, R.E.: Parallel program schemata. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 3(2), 147–195 (1969)
Pan, J.Z., Thomas, E., Zhao, Y.: Completeness guaranteed approximations for owl-dl query answering. In: Grau, et al. (eds.) (2009)
Ren, Y., Gröner, G., Lemcke, J., Rahmani, T., Friesen, A., et al.: Validating process refinement with ontologies. In: Grau, et al, eds. (2009)
Ren, Y., Gröner, G., Lemcke, J., Rahmani, T., Friesen, A., et al.: Validating process refinement with ontologies. In: Kendall, E.F., Pan, J.Z., Sabbouh, M., Stojanovic, L., Zhao, Y. (eds.) 5th International Workshop on Semantic Web Enabled Software Engineering (SWESE), CEUR Workshop Proceedings. vol. 524, pp. 1–15. CEUR-WS.org (2009b) ISSN 1613-0073, http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-524/swese2009_1.pdf
Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z., Zhao, Y.: Soundness preserving approximation for tbox reasoning in r. In: Grau, et al (eds.) (2009)
Vanhatalo, J., Völzer, H., Leymann, F.: Faster and more focused control-flow analysis for business process models through sese decomposition. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 43–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Wyner, G.M., Lee, J.: Defining specialization for process models. In: Organizing Business Knowledge: The MIT Process Handbook, ch. 5, pp. 131–174. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003), http://ccs.mit.edu/papers/pdf/wp216.pdf
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lemcke, J., Rahmani, T., Friesen, A. (2010). Semantic Business Process Engineering. In: Aßmann, U., Bartho, A., Wende, C. (eds) Reasoning Web. Semantic Technologies for Software Engineering. Reasoning Web 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6325. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15543-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15543-7_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15542-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15543-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)