skip to main content
10.1145/2837185.2837248acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiiwasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

A situation-aware workflow modelling extension

Published:11 December 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

The automation of business processes is of vital importance for organizations to speed up their business and to lower costs. Due to emerging technologies in the field of Internet of Things, changing situations can be recognized automatically, which provides the basis for an automated adaptation of process executions in order to react to changing circumstances. Although approaches exist that enable creating self-adapting workflows, a systematic modelling approach that supports the specification of situational dependencies directly in workflow models is missing. In this paper, we tackle this issue by presenting a modelling extension called SitME that defines (i) an extensible Situation Event type, (ii) the concept of Situational Scopes, and (iii) a visual notation. As the introduced extension is language-independent, we apply the approach to BPEL to validate its practical feasibility.

References

  1. M. Adams, A. H. M. ter Hofstede, D. Edmond, and W. M. P. van der Aalst. Worklets: A service-oriented implementation of dynamic flexibility in workflows. In CoopIS 2006, pages 291--308. Springer, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. S. Appel, P. Kleber, S. Frischbier, T. Freudenreich, and A. Buchmann. Modeling and execution of event stream processing in business processes. Information Systems, 46:140--156, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. L. Ardissono, R. Furnari, A. Goy, G. Petrone, and M. Segnan. Context-Aware Workflow Management. In ICWE 2007, pages 47--52. Springer, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. L. Atzori, A. Iera, and G. Morabito. The Internet of Things: A survey. Computer Networks, 54:2787--2805, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. A. Bucchiarone, A. Lafuente, A. Marconi, and M. Pistore. A formalisation of adaptable pervasive flows. In Web Services and Formal Methods, volume 6194, pages 61--75. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. F. Casati, S. Ceri, S. Paraboschi, and G. Pozzi. Specification and implementation of exceptions in workflow management systems. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 24(3):405--451, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. F. Casati, M. Fugini, and I. Mirbel. An environment for designing exceptions in workflows. Information Systems, 24:255--273, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. R. Conforti, M. L. Rosa, G. Fortino, A. H. ter Hofstede, J. Recker, and M. Adams. Real-time risk monitoring in business processes: A sensor-based approach. Journal of Systems and Software, 86(11):2939--2965, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. M. Großmann, M. Bauer, N. Hönle, U.-P. Käppeler, D. Nicklas, and T. Schwarz. Efficiently managing context information for large-scale scenarios. In PerCom 2005, pages 331--340. IEEE, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. K. Häussermann et al. Understanding and designing situation-aware mobile and ubiquitous computing systems. In ICCESSE 2010, pages 329--339. WASET, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. P. Hirmer et al. SitRS -- A Situation Recognition Service based on Modeling and Executing Situation Templates. In SummerSOC, pages 35--49, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. O. Kopp, D. Martin, D. Wutke, and F. Leymann. The Difference Between Graph-Based and Block-Structured Business Process Modelling Languages. Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems, 4(1):3--13, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. R. Lange et al. Making the world wide space happen: New challenges for the nexus context platform. In PerCom 2009, pages 1--4. IEEE, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. H. Lasi, P. Fettke, H.-G. Kemper, T. Feld, and M. Hoffmann. Industry 4.0. BISE, 6(4):239--242, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. F. Leymann and D. Roller. Production Workflow: Concepts and Techniques. Prentice Hall PTR, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. A. Marrella and M. Mecella. Continuous planning for solving business process adaptivity. In Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, volume 81, pages 118--132. Springer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. S. Mitsch et al. Making workflows situation aware: An ontology-driven framework for dynamic spatial systems. In iiWAS 2011, pages 182--188. ACM, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. D. L. Moody. The "physics" of notations: Toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 35(6):756--779, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. OASIS. Web Services Business Process Execution Language (WS-BPEL) Version 2.0. OASIS, April 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. OMG. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), Version 2.0, January 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A.-W. Scheer, O. Thomas, and O. Adam. Process-Aware Information Systems: Bridging People and Software Through Process Technology, chapter Process Modeling Using EventDriven Process Chains. John Wiley & Sons, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. P. Spiess et al. SOA-Based Integration of the Internet of Things in Enterprise Services. In ICWS 2009, pages 968--975. IEEE, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. N. van Beest and D. Bucur. Continuous correctness of business processes against process interference. In SOCA 2013, pages 110--117. IEEE, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. N. van Beest, P. Bulanov, H. Wortmann, and A. Lazovik. Resolving business process interference via dynamic reconfiguration. In Service-Oriented Computing, volume 6470, pages 47--60. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. N. van Beest, E. Kaldeli, P. Bulanov, J. Wortmann, and A. Lazovik. Automated runtime repair of business processes. Information Systems, 39:45--79, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. O. Vermesan and P. Friess. Internet of Things: Converging Technologies for Smart Environments and Integrated Ecosystems. River Publishers, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. P. Wang, H. Li, and B. Zhang. Context-aware workflow modeling approach using OWL. In CCDC 2014, pages 4161--4165. IEEE, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. M. Wieland et al. Using Context-aware Workflows for Failure Management in a Smart Factory. In UBICOMM 2010, pages 379--384. IARIA, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. M. Wieland, O. Kopp, D. Nicklas, and F. Leymann. Towards Context-Aware Workflows. In CAiSE 2007, volume 2, pages 577--591, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. M. Wieland, D. Martin, O. Kopp, and F. Leymann. SOEDA: A Methodology for Specification and Implementation of Applications on a Service-Oriented Event-Driven Architecture. In BIS 2009, pages 193--204. Springer, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. M. Wieland, H. Schwarz, U. Breitenbücher, and F. Leymann. Towards Situation-Aware Adaptive Workflows. In PerCom Workshops 2015, pages 32--37. IEEE, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. H. Wolf, K. Herrmann, and K. Rothermel. Modeling dynamic context awareness for situated workflows. In OTM 2009 Workshops, pages 98--107. Springer, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A situation-aware workflow modelling extension

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          iiWAS '15: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services
          December 2015
          704 pages
          ISBN:9781450334914
          DOI:10.1145/2837185

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 11 December 2015

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • short-paper

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader