Isotactics as a Foundation for Alignment and Abstraction of Behavioral Models

There are many use cases in business process management that require the comparison of behavioral models. For instance, verifying equivalence is the basis for assessing whether a technical workflow correctly implements a business process, or whether a process realization conforms to a reference process. This paper proposes an equivalence relation for models that describe behaviors based on the concurrency semantics of net theory and for which an alignment relation has been defined. This equivalence, called isotactics, preserves the level of concurrency of aligned operations. Furthermore, we elaborate on the conditions under which an alignment relation can be classified as an abstraction. Finally, we show that alignment relations induced by structural refinements of behavioral models are indeed behavioral abstractions.

[1]  Wolfgang Reisig,et al.  The Non-sequential Behavior of Petri Nets , 1983, Inf. Control..

[2]  Mathias Weske,et al.  Process Model Abstraction: A Slider Approach , 2008, 2008 12th International IEEE Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference.

[3]  M. Weidlich,et al.  Behaviour Equivalence and Compatibility of Business Process Models with Complex Correspondences , 2012, Comput. J..

[4]  Ernest Teniente,et al.  Validation of mappings between schemas , 2008, Data Knowl. Eng..

[5]  César Fernández,et al.  Non-sequential Processes , 1986, Advances in Petri Nets.

[6]  Carla Simone,et al.  A survey of equivalence notions for net based systems , 1992, Advances in Petri Nets: The DEMON Project.

[7]  Thomas Kühne,et al.  Matters of (Meta-) Modeling , 2006, Software & Systems Modeling.

[8]  Jan Verelst,et al.  When are two Workflows the Same? , 2005, CATS.

[9]  Raymond R. Devillers,et al.  Concurrent bisimulations in Petri nets , 2005, Acta Informatica.

[10]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Petri Nets, Event Structures and Domains , 1979, Semantics of Concurrent Computation.

[11]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Petri Nets, Event Structures and Domains, Part I , 1981, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Inheritance of behavior , 2001, J. Log. Algebraic Methods Program..

[13]  David Park,et al.  Concurrency and Automata on Infinite Sequences , 1981, Theoretical Computer Science.

[14]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  Deciding Behaviour Compatibility of Complex Correspondences between Process Models , 2010, BPM.

[15]  Jörg Desel,et al.  Free choice Petri nets , 1995 .

[16]  Mathias Weske,et al.  The Triconnected Abstraction of Process Models , 2009, BPM.

[17]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  The Linear Time - Branching Time Spectrum II , 1993, CONCUR.

[18]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Inheritance of Business Processes: A Journey Visiting Four Notorious Problems , 2003, Petri Net Technology for Communication-Based Systems.

[19]  J. Euzenat,et al.  Ontology Matching , 2007, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[20]  Jussi Vanhatalo,et al.  Simplified Computation and Generalization of the Refined Process Structure Tree , 2010, WS-FM.

[21]  R. J. vanGlabbeek.  The linear time - branching time spectrum , 1990 .

[22]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  The Application of Petri Nets to Workflow Management , 1998, J. Circuits Syst. Comput..

[23]  César Fernández.  Non-sequential Processes , 1986, Advances in Petri Nets.

[24]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  The Linear Time-Branching Time Spectrum (Extended Abstract) , 1990, CONCUR.

[25]  Olga Levina,et al.  Granularity as a Cognitive Factor in the Effectiveness of Business Process Model Reuse , 2009, BPM.

[26]  Samuil Angelov,et al.  Petri Net Technology for Communication-Based Systems , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[27]  Mathias Weske,et al.  Business Process Model Abstraction , 2015, Handbook on Business Process Management.

[28]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  The ICoP Framework: Identification of Correspondences between Process Models , 2010, CAiSE.

[29]  Gérard Berthelot,et al.  Checking properties of nets using transformation , 1985, Applications and Theory in Petri Nets.

[30]  Rob J. van Glabbeek,et al.  Branching time and abstraction in bisimulation semantics , 1996, JACM.

[31]  Duen-Ren Liu,et al.  Workflow modeling for virtual processes: an order-preserving process-view approach , 2003, Inf. Syst..

[32]  Michel C. A. Klein,et al.  Ontology Evolution: Not the Same as Schema Evolution , 2004, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[33]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  Aligning Business Process Models , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference.

[34]  Wilfried Brauer,et al.  A survey of behaviour and equivalence preserving refinements of Petri nets , 1991, Applications and Theory of Petri Nets.

[35]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  Petri Net Transformations for Business Processes - A Survey , 2009, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[36]  Robin Milner,et al.  A Calculus of Communicating Systems , 1980, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[37]  Erhard Rahm,et al.  A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching , 2001, The VLDB Journal.

[38]  Tadao Murata,et al.  Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications , 1989, Proc. IEEE.