Hierarchical declarative modelling with refinement and sub-processes

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 8659 LNCS, Issue , 2014, Pages 18-33

  Debois, Søren ^a   Hildebrandt, Thomas ^a   Slaats, Tijs ^a,b  

^a IT UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b Exformatics A S   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTERS;

CASE MANAGEMENT; DECLARATIVE MODELLING; DECLARATIVE MODELS; DYNAMIC CONDITION; GRAPH MODEL;

ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84906729607     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-10172-9_2     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., Westergaard, M., Maggi, F.M.: Declare. Webpage (2010), http://www.win.tue.nl/declare/
2. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1-23. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
3. Carbone, M., Hildebrandt, T., Perrone, G.,Wasowski, A.: Refinement for transition systems with responses. In: FIT. EPTCS, vol. 87, pp. 48-55 (2012)
4. Debois, S.: DCR exploration tool v.6. IT University of Copenhagen (2014), http://www.itu.dk/research/models/wiki/index.php/DCR-Exploration-Tool
5. Ellson, J., Gansner, E., Koutsofios, L., North, S.C., Woodhull, G.: Graphviz - open source graph drawing tools. In: Mutzel, P., Jünger, M., Leipert, S. (eds.) GD 2001. LNCS, vol. 2265, pp. 483-484. Springer, Heidelberg (2002), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45848-4-57
6. Groefsema, H., Bucur, D.: A survey of formal business process verification: From soundness to variability. In: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design, pp. 198-203 (2013), http://www.cs.rug.nl/ds/uploads/pubs/groefsema-bmsd.pdf
7. Hildebrandt, T., Marquard, M., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T.: Dynamic condition response graphs for trustworthy adaptive case management. In: Demey, Y.T., Panetto, H. (eds.) OTM 2013 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 8186, pp. 166-171. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
8. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R.: Declarative event-based workflow as distributed dynamic condition response graphs. In: PLACES. EPTCS, vol. 69, pp. 59-73 (2010)
9. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T.: Nested dynamic condition response graphs. In: Arbab, F., Sirjani, M. (eds.) FSEN 2011. LNCS, vol. 7141, pp. 343-350. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
10. Hildebrandt, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Slaats, T.: Safe distribution of declarative processes. In: Barthe, G., Pardo, A., Schneider, G. (eds.) SEFM 2011. LNCS, vol. 7041, pp. 237-252. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
11. Hull, R., et al.: Introducing the guard-stage-milestone approach for specifying business entity lifecycles (Invited talk). In: Bravetti, M. (ed.) WS-FM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6551, pp. 1-24. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
12. Maggi, F.M., Westergaard, M., Montali, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Runtime verification of LTL-based declarative process models. In: Khurshid, S., Sen, K. (eds.) RV 2011. LNCS, vol. 7186, pp. 131-146. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
13. Montali, M.: Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models. LNBIP, vol. 56. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
14. Mukkamala, R.R.: A Formal Model For DeclarativeWorkflows: Dynamic Condition Response Graphs. Ph.D. thesis, IT University of Copenhagen (June 2012)
15. Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T., Slaats, T.: Towards trustworthy adaptive case management with dynamic condition response graphs. In: EDOC, pp. 127-136. IEEE (2013)
16. Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T.: From dynamic condition response structures to büchi automata. In: TASE, pp. 187-190. IEEE Computer Society (2010)
17. Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T., Tøth, J.B.: The resultmaker online consultant: From declarative workflow management in practice to ltl. In: EDOCW, pp. 135-142. IEEE Computer Society (2008)
18. Object Management Group BPMN Technical Committee: Business Process Model and Notation, version 2.0, http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/PDF
19. Reijers, H., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.: On the usefulness of subprocesses in business process models. BPM Reports 1003, Eindhoven (2010)
20. Slaats, T., Mukkamala, R.R., Hildebrandt, T., Marquard, M.: Exformatics declarative case management workflows as DCR graphs. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 339-354. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
21. Vardi, M.Y.: An automata-theoretic approach to linear temporal logic. In: Moller, F., Birtwistle, G. (eds.) Logics for Concurrency. LNCS, vol. 1043, pp. 238-266. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)
22. Winskel, G.: Event structures. In: Brauer, W., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 1986. LNCS, vol. 255, pp. 325-392. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)
23. Zugal, S., Soffer, P., Pinggera, J., Weber, B.: Expressiveness and understandability considerations of hierarchy in declarative business process models. In: Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Wrycza, S. (eds.) BPMDS 2012 and EMMSAD 2012. LNBIP, vol. 113, pp. 167-181. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)