Process SEER: A Tool for Semantic Effect Annotation of Business Process Models

A key challenge in devising solutions to a range of problems associated with business process management: process life cycle management, compliance management, enterprise process architectures etc. is the problem of identifying process semantics. The current industry standard business process modeling notation, BPMN, provides little by way of semantic description of the effects of a process (beyond what can be conveyed via the nomenclature of tasks and the decision conditions associated with gateways). In this paper, we describe the conceptual underpinnings, design, implementation and evaluation of the ProcessSEER tool that supports several strategies for obtaining semantic effect descriptions of BPMN process models, without imposing an overly onerous burden of using formal specification on the analyst. The tool requires analysts to describe the immediate effects of each task. These are then accumulated in an automated fashion to obtain cumulative effect annotations for each task in a process. The tool leverages domain ontologies wherever they are available. The tool permits the analyst to specify immediate effect annotations in a practitioner-accessible controlled natural language, which enables formal specification using a limited repertoire of natural language sentence formats. The tool also leverages semantic web services in a similar fashion.

[1]  Aneesh Krishna,et al.  Combined Approach for Supporting the Business Process Model Lifecycle , 2006, PACIS.

[2]  Rolf Schwitter,et al.  Working for Two: A Bidirectional Grammar for a Controlled Natural Language , 2008, Australasian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[3]  Dieter Fensel,et al.  Semantic Web Services, Part 2 , 2007, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[4]  Kaarel Kaljurand,et al.  ATTEMPTO CONTROLLED ENGLISH AS A SEMANTIC WEB LANGUAGE , 2007 .

[5]  Wil M.P. van der Aalst,et al.  Pi calculus versus petri nets: let us eat humble pie rather than further inflate the Pi hype , 2005 .

[6]  Daniel Jackson,et al.  Lightweight Formal Methods , 2001, FME.

[7]  Yun Lin,et al.  Semantic Annotation for Process Models: Facilitating Process Knowledge Management via Semantic Interoperability , 2008 .

[8]  Norbert E. Fuchs,et al.  Web-Annotations for Humans and Machines , 2007, ESWC.

[9]  Valentin Goranko,et al.  Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning About Systems , 2007, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[10]  Shazia Wasim Sadiq,et al.  Detecting Regulatory Compliance for Business Process Models through Semantic Annotations , 2008, Business Process Management Workshops.

[11]  Murray Shanahan.  Solving the frame problem - a mathematical investigation of the common sense law of inertia , 1997 .

[12]  Yair Wand,et al.  Goal-Driven Analysis of Process Model Validity , 2004, CAiSE.

[13]  Norbert E. Fuchs,et al.  Attempto - From Specifications in Controlled Natural Language towards Executable Specifications , 1996, ArXiv.

[14]  Arindama Singh,et al.  Prime implicants of first order formulas via transversal clauses , 2004, Int. J. Comput. Math..

[15]  Jerry R. Hobbs,et al.  DAML-S: Semantic Markup for Web Services , 2001, SWWS.

[16]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Introduction to the Fourth International Workshop on Business Process Intelligence (BPI 2008) , 2008, Business Process Management Workshops.

[17]  I. Weber,et al.  Semantic Business Process Validation , 2008 .

[18]  Arindama Singh,et al.  Prime Implicates of First Order Formulas , 2004, Int. J. Comput. Sci. Appl..

[19]  Pnina Soffer.  Scope analysis: identifying the impact of changes in business process models , 2005, Softw. Process. Improv. Pract..

[20]  Aditya Ghose,et al.  Correlating Business Process and Organizational Models to Manage Change , 2006 .