Modeling languages for business processes and business rules: A representational analysis

Information Systems

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 379-390

  zur Muehlen, Michael ^a   Indulska, Marta ^b  

^a STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

BPMN; Business process management; Business process modeling; Business rule modeling; BWW; PRR; Representation theory; SBVR; SRML; SWRL

Indexed keywords

BUSINESS PROCESS; BUSINESS PROCESS MANAGEMENT; BUSINESS PROCESS MODELING; BUSINESS RULES; BUSINESS VOCABULARY; COMBINED PROCESS; MODELING LANGUAGES; MODELING TYPE; ORGANIZATIONAL POLICIES; PROCESS MODELING; PROCESS MODELING LANGUAGE; PRODUCTION RULES; REPRESENTATION MODEL; REPRESENTATION THEORY; RULE MODELING; SEMANTIC WEB RULES; SIMPLE RULES;

ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROCESSING; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; MANAGEMENT SCIENCE; MARKUP LANGUAGES; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS; ONTOLOGY; QUERY LANGUAGES; SEMANTICS; SPECIFICATIONS;

LINGUISTICS;

EID: 77049089544     PISSN: 03064379     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.is.2009.02.006     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. A. Charfi, M. Mezini, Hybrid web service composition: business processes meet business rules, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Service Oriented Computing, New York, NY, USA, 2004.
2. Chisholm R.M. The basic ontological categories. In: Mulligan K. (Ed). Language, Truth, and Ontology vol. 51 (1992), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 1-13
3. C. D'amato, S. Staab, N. Fanizzi, On the influence of description logics ontologies on conceptual similarity, in: Paper presented at the 16th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering: Practice and Patterns, Italy, 2008.
4. M. Ehrig, S. Staab, QOM - quick ontology mapping, in: Paper presented at the Third International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2004), Japan, 2004.
5. Gartner Group, Making the Difference: The 2008 CIO Agenda (Gartner EXP Premier Reports ed.), Gartner Group, Inc., Egham, UK, 2008.
6. P. Green, M. Rosemann, Perceived ontological weaknesses of process modelling techniques: further evidence, in: Paper presented at the 10th European Conference on Information Systems, Gdansk, 2002.
7. Green P., Rosemann M., Indulska M., and Manning C. Candidate interoperability standards: an ontological overlap analysis. Data and Knowledge Engineering 62 2 (2007) 274-291
8. Green P.F., Rosemann M., and Indulska M. Ontological evaluation of enterprise systems interoperability using Ebxml. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 17 5 (2005) 713-725
9. Herbst H., Knolmayer G., Myrach T., and Schlesinger M. The specification of business rules: a comparison of selected methodologies. In: Verijn-Stuart A.A., and Olle T.-W. (Eds). Methods and Associated Tools for the Information System Life Cycle (1994), Elsevier, Amsterdam 29-46
10. I. Horrocks, P.F. Patel-Schneider, H. Boley, S. Tabet, B. Grosof, M. Dean, Swrl: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining Owl and Ruleml, W3C Member Submission, 2004.
11. Jensen K. Coloured petri nets and the invariant method. Theoretical Computer Science 14 3 (1981) 317-336
12. Jos D.B., Marc E., Cristina F., Francisco J.M.-R., Francois S., and Moritz W. Ontology mediation, merging and aligning. In: John D., Paul W., and Rudi S. (Eds) (2006), Wiley, New York
13. G. Kappel, S. Rausch-Schott, W. Retschitzegger, Coordination in workflow management systems - a rule-based approach, in: W. Conen, G. Neumann (Eds.), Coordination Technology for Collaborative Applications - Organizations, Processes, and Agents, 1364 ed., vol. 1364, Springer, Berlin, 1998, pp. 99-119.
14. Knolmayer G.F., Endl R., and Pfahrer M. Modeling processes and workflows by business rules. In: van der Aalst W.M.P., Desel J., and Oberweis A. (Eds). Business Process Management, Models, Techniques, and Empirical Studies vol. 1806 (2000), Springer, London 16-29
15. Kovacic A. Business renovation: business rules (still) the missing link. Business Process Management Journal 10 2 (2004) 158
16. Krogstie J., McBrien P., Owens R., and Seltveit A.H. Information systems development using a combination of process and rule-based approaches. In: Andersen R., Bubenko Jr. J.A., and Solvberg A. (Eds). Third International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE '91) (1991), Springer, Trondheim, Norway 319-335
17. R. Lu, S. Sadiq, A survey of comparative business process modeling approaches, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Business Information Systems, Poznan, Poland, 2007.
18. Maedche A., and Staab S. Comparing Ontologies - Similarity Measures and a Comparison Study (Internal Report 408) (2001), Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe
19. R.J. Mayer, C.P. Menzel, P.S. Mayer, Idef3: A Methodology for Process Description, 1991.
20. P. Mcbrien, A.H. Seltveit, Coupling process models and business rules, in: Proceedings of the IFIP 8.1 WG Conference on Information Systems Development for Decentralized Organizations, 1995.
21. J. Meng, S.Y.W. Su, H. Lam, A. Helal, Achieving dynamic inter-organizational workflow management by integrating business processes, events and rules, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences System Sciences, HICSS 2002, Waikoloa, HI, 2002.
22. OMG, Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules Specification, Second Interim Specification, dtc/06-08-05, 2006, p. 380.
23. OMG, Production Rules Representation, Beta 1, Adopted Specification, dtc/07-11-04, 2007, p. 70.
24. OMG, Business Process Modeling Notation, V1.1 OMG Available Specification, formal/2008-01-17, 2008, p. 294.
25. J. Recker, Understanding process modelling grammar continuance: a study of the consequences of representational capabilities, Ph.D. Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, 2008.
26. J. Recker, M. Indulska, M. Rosemann, P. Green, Do process modelling techniques get better? A comparative ontological analysis of BPMN, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 16th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Sydney, Australia, 2005.
27. J. Recker, M. Indulska, M. Rosemann, P. Green, How good is BPMN really? Insights from theory and practice, in: Paper presented at the 14th European Conference on Information Systems, Goeteborg, Sweden, 2006.
28. M. Rosemann, P.F. Green, M. Indulska, 2004. A reference methodology for conducting ontological analyses, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Shanghai, China.
29. Rosemann M., Recker J., Indulska M., and Green P. A study of the evolution of the representational capabilities of process modeling grammars. In: Dubois E., and Pohl K. (Eds). Advanced Information Systems Engineering - CAiSE 2006 vol. 4001 (2006), Springer, Luxembourg, Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg 447-461
30. G.K. Royce, Integration of a business rules engine to manage frequently changing workflow: a case study of insurance underwriting workflow, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2007 Americas Conference on Information Systems, Keystone, CO, 2007.
31. Scheer A., Thomas O., and Adam O. Process modeling using event-driven process chains. Process-Aware Information Systems: Bridging People and Software through Process Technology (2005), Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey 119-145
32. Schmidt K. Of maps and scripts the status of formal constructs in cooperative work. Information and Software Technology 41 6 (1999) 319-329
33. Steinke G., and Nikolette C. Business rules as the basis of an organization's information systems. Industrial Management and Data Systems 103 1/2 (2003) 52
34. M. Thorpe, C. Ke, Simple Rule Markup Language (SRML): a general XML rule representation for forward-chaining rules, XML coverpages, 2001, p. 1.
35. Uschold M., King M., Moralee S., and Zorgios Y. The enterprise ontology. Knowledge Engineering Review 13 (1998) 31-89
36. Van Der Aalst W.M.P., Ter Hofstede A.H.M., Kiepuszewski B., and Barros A.P. Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14 1 (2003) 5-51
37. G. Wagner, Rule modeling and markup, in: N. Eisinger, J. Maluszynski (Eds.), Reasoning Web, 3564 ed., vol. 3564, Springer, Berlin, Msida, Malta, 2005, pp. 251-274.
38. Wand Y., and Weber R. On the ontological expressiveness of information systems analysis and design grammars. Information Systems Journal 3 4 (1993) 217-237
39. Weber R. Ontological Foundations of Information Systems. monograph ed. (1997), Coopers & Lybrand, Melbourne, Australia
40. B. Wyssusek, Ontology and ontologies in information systems analysis and design: a critique, in: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2004 Americas Conference on Information Systems, New York, USA, 2004.
41. Wyssusek B. On ontological foundations of conceptual modelling. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 18 1 (2006) 63-80