[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
article
Free access

A framework for formalizing inconsistencies and deviations in human-centered systems

Published: 01 July 1996 Publication History

Abstract

Most modern business activities are carried out by a combination of computerized tools and human agents. Typical examples are engineering design activities, office procedures, and banking systems. All these human-centered systems are characterized by the interaction among people, and between people and computerized tools. This interaction defines a process, whose effectiveness is essential to ensure the quality of the delivered products and/or services. To support these systems, process-centered environments and workflow management systems have been recently developed. They can be collectively identified with the term process technology. This technology is based on the explicit definition of the process to be followed (the process model). The model specifies the kind of support that has to be provided to human agents. An essential property that process technology mut exhibit is the ability of tolerating, controlling, and supporting deviations and inconsistencies of the real-world behaviors with respect to the proocess model. This is necessary to provide consistent and effective support to the human-centered system, still maintaining a high degree of flexibility and adaptability to the evolving needs, preferences, an expertise of the the human agents. This article presents a formal framework to characterize the interaction between a human-centered system and its automated support. It does not aim at introducing a new language or system to describe processes. Rather, it aims at identifying the basic properties and features that make it possible to formally define the concepts of inconsistency and deviation. This formal framework can then be used to compare existing solutions and guide future research work.

References

[1]
ARBAOUI, S. AND OQUENDO, F. 1993a. Managing inconsistencies between process enactment and process performance states. In Proceedings of the 8th International Software Process Workshop (Wadern, Germany, Mar.). IEEE, New York.]]
[2]
ARBAOUI, S. AND OQUENDO, F. 1993b. Software process performance support in PEACE. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering and Its Applications (Paris, France, Nov.).]]
[3]
BALZER, R. 1991. Tolerating inconsistency. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering (Austin, Tex., May). IEEE, New York.]]
[4]
BANDINELLI, S., DI NITTO, E., AND FUGGETTA, A. 1994a. Policies and mechanisms to support process evolution in PSEEs. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Software Process (Reston, Va., Oct.). IEEE, New York.]]
[5]
BANDINELLI, S., DI NITTO, E., AND FUGGETTA, A. 1995. Supporting cooperation in software development. Tech. Rep. 32-95, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.]]
[6]
BANDINELLI, S., FUGGETTA, A., AND GHEZZI, C. 1993. Process model evolution in the SPADE environment. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19, 12 (Dec.).]]
[7]
BANDINELLI, S., FUGGETTA, A., GHEZZI, C., AND LAVAZZA, L. 1994b. SPADE: An environment for software process analysis, design, and enactment. In Software Process Modeling and Technology, A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. A. Nuseibeh, Eds. Research Studies Press, Taunton, U.K.]]
[8]
BARDEN, R., STEPNEY, S., AND COOPER, D. 1994. Z in Practice. Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, N.J.]]
[9]
BARGHOUTI, N.S. AND KAISER, G.E. 1991. Scaling up rule-based software development environments. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Software Engineering Conference. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 550. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.]]
[10]
BARGHOUTI, N. S. AND KRISHNAMURTHY, B. 1995. Using event contexts and matching constraints to monitor software processes. In Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Software Engineering (Seattle, Wash., Apr.). ACM, New York.]]
[11]
CONRADI, R., FERNSTROM, C., AND FUGGETTA, A. 1994. Concepts for evolving software processes. In Software Process Modeling and Technology, A. Finkelstein, J. Kramer, and B. A. Nuseibeh, Eds. Research Studies Press, Chichester, U.K.]]
[12]
COOK, J. E. AND WOLF, A.L. 1994. Toward metrics for process validation. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Software Process (Reston, Va., Oct.). IEEE, New York.]]
[13]
CSEG. 1991. A formal development methodology for high confidence systems. Tech. Rep., Communications-Electronics Security Group (L7), Government Communication Headquarters, Cheltenham, U.K.]]
[14]
CUGOLA, G., DI NITTO, E., GHEZZI, C., AND MANTIONE, M. 1995. How to deal with deviations during process model enactment. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Software Engineering (Seattle, Wash., Apr.). ACM, New York.]]
[15]
DOWSON, M. AND FERNSTROM, C. 1994. Towards requirements for enactment mechanisms. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Software Process Technology. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 772. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.]]
[16]
ELLIS, C.A., KEDDARA, K., AND ROSENBERG, G. 1995. Dynamic change within workflow systems. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Organizational Computing Systems. ACM, New York.]]
[17]
FERNSTROM, C. 1993. State models and protocols in process-centered environment. In Proceedings of the 8th International Software Process Workshop (Wadern, Germany, Mar.). IEEE, New York.]]
[18]
FINKELSTEIN, A., KRAMER, J., AND NUSEIBEH, B. 1994. Software Process Modeling and Technology. Research Studies Press, Taunton, U.K.]]
[19]
FINKELSTEIN, A., KRAMER, J., NUSEIBEH, B., FINKELSTEIN, L., AND GOEDICKE, M. 1992. Viewpoints: A framework for integrating multiple perspectives in system development. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 2, 1 (Mar.), 31-58.]]
[20]
GEORGAKOPOULOS, D., HORNICK, H., AND SHETH, A. 1995. An overview of workflow managemeAt: From process modeling to workflow automation infrastructure. Distrib. Parallel Databases 3.]]
[21]
GHEZZI, C. AND KEMMERER, R.A. 1991. ASTRAL: An assertion language for specifying real-time systems. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Software Engineering Conference. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 550. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.]]
[22]
HAGENSEN, T. M. AND KRISTENSEN, B.B. 1992. Consistency in software system development: Framework, models, techniques and tools. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Software Development Environments. Softw. Eng. Notes 17.]]
[23]
HUMPHREY, W.S. 1995. A Discipline for Software Engineering. SEI Series in Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.]]
[24]
JACKSON, M. 1995a. Software Requirements and Specifications. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.]]
[25]
JACKSON, M. 1995b. The world and the machine. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Software Engineering (Seattle, Wash., Apr.). ACM, New York.]]
[26]
KAPOSI, A. AND MYERS, M. 1994. Systems, Models and Measures. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.]]
[27]
KRISHNAMURTHY, B. AND ROSENBLUM, D.S. 1991. An event-action model of computer-supported cooperative work: Design and implementation. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, New York.]]
[28]
MADHAVJI, N. H. AND PENEDO, M. H., Eds. 1993. Special issue on process evolution. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19, 12 (Dec).]]
[29]
NARAYANASWAMY, Z. AND GOLDMAN, N. 1992. Lazy consistency: A basis for cooperative software development. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, New York.]]
[30]
O2. 1992. The 02 User Manual. 02 Technology.]]
[31]
ROSENBLUM, D. S. AND KRISHNAMURTHY, B. 1991. An event-based model of software configuration management. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Software Configuration Management.]]
[32]
SOMMERVILLE, I. AND RODDEN, T. 1996. Human, social and organizational influences on the software process. In Trends in Software. Vol. 4, Software Process, A. Fuggetta and A. Wolf, Eds. John Wiley, New York.]]
[33]
SPIVEY, J.M. 1992. The Z Notation: A Reference Manual. 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.]]
[34]
STRONG, M. AND MILLER, M. 1995. Exceptions and exception handling in computerized information processes. ACM Trans. Inf. Sys. 13, 2 (Apr.).]]
[35]
TULLY, C. 1995. The software process and the modeling of complex systems. In Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Software Process Technology. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 913. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.]]

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)IDE4ICDS: A Human-Centric and Model-Driven Proposal to Improve the Digitization of Clinical Practice GuidelineACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/367473233:7(1-38)Online publication date: 28-Jun-2024
  • (2021)Architectural Deviations and Inconsistencies Management: A Framework Based on Information Systems UrbanizationProcedia Computer Science10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.309181(1122-1130)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2016)Estimation and Characterization of Activity Duration in Business ProcessesInformation Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems10.1007/978-3-319-40581-0_59(729-740)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2016
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Reviews

Michael Lee Gordon

A human-centered system is one in which humans, supported by computerized aids, play a key role. It can be defined as a combination of humans, organizational structures, rules, procedures, and computerized tools. The authors present a formal framework to characterize the interaction between a human-centered system and its automated support. They aim to identify the basic properties and features that make it possible to formally define the concepts of inconsistency and deviation. The authors have applied their framework to the assessment of the features of several process-centered software engineering environments. They argue that completeness is mainly related to the features and characteristics of the language used to model processes, while coherence is more strictly related to the architecture of the process support system. The authors believe that the results of this work can be used both to assess and compare existing systems and to clarify and guide further research work, and moreover, that it can be used in a more general context to study the relationship between a computerized system and the real world with which it interacts.

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology  Volume 5, Issue 3
July 1996
102 pages
ISSN:1049-331X
EISSN:1557-7392
DOI:10.1145/234426
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 1996
Published in TOSEM Volume 5, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. business processes
  2. deviation
  3. formal model
  4. human-centered systems
  5. inconsistency
  6. software processes

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)169
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)18
Reflects downloads up to 20 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)IDE4ICDS: A Human-Centric and Model-Driven Proposal to Improve the Digitization of Clinical Practice GuidelineACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology10.1145/367473233:7(1-38)Online publication date: 28-Jun-2024
  • (2021)Architectural Deviations and Inconsistencies Management: A Framework Based on Information Systems UrbanizationProcedia Computer Science10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.309181(1122-1130)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2016)Estimation and Characterization of Activity Duration in Business ProcessesInformation Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems10.1007/978-3-319-40581-0_59(729-740)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2016
  • (2014)Software processFuture of Software Engineering Proceedings10.1145/2593882.2593883(1-12)Online publication date: 31-May-2014
  • (2014)Crowdsourcing tasks to social networks in BPEL4PeopleWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-012-0180-617:1(1-32)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2014
  • (2013)Workflow management for ETL developmentJournal of Decision Systems10.1080/12460125.2013.82996122:4(319-331)Online publication date: Nov-2013
  • (2012)Dealing with changes in service orchestrationsProceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/2245276.2232100(1961-1967)Online publication date: 26-Mar-2012
  • (2012)Inconsistency Recovery in Business Processes Using a Possibilistic WorkFlow NetProceedings of the 2012 31st International Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society10.1109/SCCC.2012.13(41-50)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2012
  • (2012)Possibilistic WorkFlow nets to deal with non-conformance in process execution2012 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC)10.1109/ICSMC.2012.6377898(1219-1224)Online publication date: Oct-2012
  • (2012)Crowdsourcing Tasks in BPEL4PeopleService-Oriented Crowdsourcing10.1007/978-1-4614-5956-9_4(59-92)Online publication date: 28-Oct-2012
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media