On defining the behavior of OR-joins in business process models

Journal of Universal Computer Science

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 3-32

  Börger, Egon ^a   Sörensen, Ove ^b   Thalheim, Bernhard ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PISA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

Author keywords

BPMN standard; Business processes; OR join problem

Indexed keywords

EID: 65349135297     PISSN: 0958695X     EISSN: 09486968     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. A.-W.Scheer (1994). Business Process Engineering: Reference Models for Industrial Enterprises. Springer-Verlag, New York.
2. Batory, D. and Börger, E. (2008). Modularizing theorems for software product lines: The Jbook case study. J. Universal Computer Science, 14(12):2059-2082.
3. Batory, D. and Börger, E. Extended abstract "Coupling Design and Verification in Software Product Lines" in: S. Hartmann and G. Kern-Isberner (Eds): FoIKS 2008 (Proc. of The Fifth International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems), Springer LNCS 4932, p.1-4, 2008.
4. Börger, E. (2003). The ASM refinement method. Formal Aspects of Computing, 15:237-257.
5. Börger, E. (2007a). Construction and analysis of ground models and their refinements as a foundation for validating computer based systems. Formal Aspects of Computing, 19:225-241.
6. Börger, E. (2007b). Modeling workflow patterns from first principles. In Parent, C., Schewe, K.-D., Storey, V., and Thalheim, B., editors, Conceptual Modeling-ER 2007, volume 4801 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1-20. Springer-Verlag.
7. Börger, E. and Stärk, R. F. (2003). Abstract State Machines. A Method for High-Level System Design and Analysis. Springer.
8. Börger, E. and Thalheim, B. (2008). A method for verifiable and validatable business process modeling. In Börger, E. and Cisternino, A., editors, Advances in Software Engineering, volume 5316 of LNCS, pages 59-115. Springer-Verlag.
9. BPMI.org (2006). Business Process Modeling Notation Specification. dtc/2006-02-01 at http://www.omg.org/technology/documents/speccatalog.htm.
10. Dijkman, R. M., Dumas, M., and Ouyang, C. (2007). Formal semantics and automated analysis of BPMN process models. Technical Report 5969, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.
11. Dumas, M., Grosskopf, A., Hettel, T., and Wynn, M. (2007). Semantics of BPMN process models with or-joins. In Meersman, R. and et al., Z. T., editors, OTM 2007 Part I, volume 4803 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 41-58. Springer.
12. Graham, I. (1990). The Transputer Handbook. Prentice-Hall.
13. Grosskopf, A. (2007). xBPMN. Formal control flow specification of a BPMN based process execution language. Master's thesis, HPI at Universität Potsdam. pages 1-142.
14. Gruhn, V. and Laue, R. (2005). Einfache EPK-Semantik durch praxistaugliche Stilregeln. In Geschäftsprozessmanagement mit ereignisgesteuerten Prozessketten, pages 176-189.
15. Gruhn, V. and Laue, R. (2006). How style checking can improve business process models. In Proc. 8th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2006), Paphos (Cyprus).
16. Gruhn, V. and Laue, R. (2007). What business process modelers can learn from programmers. Science of Computer Programming, 65:4-13.
17. INMOS (1989). Transputer Implementation of Occam - Communication Process Architecture. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
18. Kindler, E. (2004). On the semantics of EPCs: A framework for resolving the vicious circle. In J.Desel, Pernici, B., and M.Weske, editors, Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Business Process Management, volume 3080 of LNCS, pages 82-97. Springer-Verlag.
19. Kindler, E. (2005). On the semantics of EPCs: resolving the vicious circle. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 56:23-40.
20. Mendling, J., Moser, M., Neumann, G., Verbeek, H., Dongen, B., and van der Aalst, W. (2006). A quantitative analysis of faulty EPCs in the SAP reference model. Technical Report BPM-06-08, BPMcenter.org.
21. Rittgen, P. (1999). Modified EPCs and their formal semantics. Technical Report 99/19, Institut für Informationssyteme, Universität Koblenz-Landau.
22. Russel, N., ter Hofstede, A., van der Aalst, W. M. P., and Edmond, D. (2007a). newyAWL: Achieving comprehensive patterns support in workflow for the contro-flow, data and resource perspectives. BPM-07-05 at BPMcenter.org.
23. Russel, N., ter Hofstede, A., van der Aalst, W. M. P., and Mulyar, N. (2006). Workflow control-flow patterns: a revised view. BPM-06-22 at http://is.tm.tue.nl/staff/wvdaalst/BPMcenter/.
24. Russel, N., ter Hofstede, A. H. M., and van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2007b). newYAWL: Specifying a workflow reference language using coloured Petri nets. Eighth Workshop and Tutorial on Practical Use of Coloured Petri Nets and the CPN Tools, Aarhus, Denmark.
25. Sörensen, O. (2008). Semantics of joins in cyclic BPMN workflows. Master's thesis, University of Kiel. www.is.informatik.uni-kiel/~thalheim/ASM/MetaProgrammingASM.
26. van der Aalst, W. Pi calculus versus Petri nets: Let us eat "humble pie" rather than inflate the "Pi hype". downloaded February 2008. http://is.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/download/pi-hype.pdf.
27. van der Aalst, W., Desel, J., and Kindler, E. (2002). On the semantics of EPCs: A vicious circle. In Rump, M. and Nüttgens, F. G., editors, Proc. of the EPK 2002: Business Process Management using EPCs, pages 71-80, Trier. Gesellschaft für Informatik.
28. van der Aalst, W. and ter Hofstede, A. (2005). YAWL: Yet another workflow language. Information Systems, 30(4):245-275.
29. van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., Kiepuszewski, B., and Barros, A.(2003).Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases, 14(3):5-51.
30. van Hee, K., Oanea, O., Serebrenik, A., Sidorova, N., and Voorhoeve, M. (2006). History-based joins: Semantics, soundness and implementation. In Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J. L., and Seth, A., editors, BPM 2006, volume 4102 of LNCS, pages 225-240. Springer-Verlag.
31. Wynn, M. (2006). Semantics, Verification, and Implementation of Workflows with Cancellation Regions and OR-Joins. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology.
32. Wynn, M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W., and ter Hofstede, A. (2005). Achieving a general, formal and decidable approach to the OR-join in workflow using reset nets. In Application and Theory of Petri Nets 2005, volume 3536 of LNCS, pages 423-443. Springer.
33. Wynn, M., van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., and Edmond, D. (2006a). Synchronisation and cancellation in workflows based on reset nets. Technical Report BPM-06-26, BPMcenter.org.
34. Wynn, M., van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., and Edmond, D. (2006b). Verifying workflows with cancellation regions and OR-joins: an approach based on reset nets and reachability analysis. In Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J. L., and Seth, A. P., editors, Business Process management BPM 2006, volume 4102 of LNCS, pages 389-394. Springer-Verlag. Previous versions edited as BPM-06-16 and BPM-06-12.
35. Wynn, M., Verbeek, H. M. W., van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., and Edmond, D. (2006c). Reduction rules for reset workflow nets. Technical Report BPM-06-25, BPMcenter.org.
36. Wynn, M., Verbeek, H. M. W., van der Aalst, W., ter Hofstede, A., and Edmond, D. (2006d). Reduction rules for YAWL workflow nets with cancellation regions and OR-joins. Technical Report BPM-06-24, BPM-center.org.