The Complexity of Deadline Analysis for Workflow Graphs with a Single Resource

Workflow graphs (WFGs) are control-flow graphs extended by parallel fork and join. They are used to represent the main control-flow of e.g. business process models modeled in languages such as BPMN or UML activity diagrams. A WFG is said to be sound if it is free of deadlocks and exhibits no lack of synchronization. We study the question whether the executions of a time-annotated sound WFG meet a given deadline. We present polynomial-time algorithms and NP-hardness results for different cases. In particular, we show that it can be decided in polynomial time whether some executions of a sound WFG meet the deadline. Furthermore we show that for general probabilistic WFGs, it is NP-hard to determine whether the probability of an execution meeting the deadline is higher than a given threshold, whereas the expected duration of an execution can be computed in polynomial time.

[1]  Dirk Fahland,et al.  The relationship between workflow graphs and free-choice workflow nets , 2015, Inf. Syst..

[2]  Uri Zwick,et al.  Exact and Approximate Distances in Graphs - A Survey , 2001, ESA.

[3]  Dirk Fahland,et al.  Analysis on demand: Instantaneous soundness checking of industrial business process models , 2011, Data Knowl. Eng..

[4]  V. Climenhaga.  Markov chains and mixing times , 2013 .

[5]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[6]  Fuji Zhang,et al.  The expected hitting times for finite Markov chains , 2008 .

[7]  Gianfranco Ciardo,et al.  Symbolic Reachability Analysis of Integer Timed Petri Nets , 2009, SOFSEM.

[8]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Probabilistic event structures and domains , 2004, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[9]  Louchka Popova-Zeugmann,et al.  Worst-case Analysis of Concurrent Systems with Duration Interval Petri Nets , 1997 .

[10]  Frank Leymann,et al.  Faster and More Focused Control-Flow Analysis for Business Process Models Through SESE Decomposition , 2007, ICSOC.

[11]  Edsger W. Dijkstra,et al.  A note on two problems in connexion with graphs , 1959, Numerische Mathematik.

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

[13]  Bengt Jonsson,et al.  A framework for reasoning about time and reliability , 1989, [1989] Proceedings. Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[14]  Marta Z. Kwiatkowska,et al.  PRISM 4.0: Verification of Probabilistic Real-Time Systems , 2011, CAV.

[15]  Eike Best,et al.  Structure Theory of Petri Nets: the Free Choice Hiatus , 1986, Advances in Petri Nets.

[16]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  An Alternative Way to Analyze Workflow Graphs , 2002, CAiSE.

[17]  Kim G. Larsen,et al.  Minimum-Cost Reachability for Priced Timed Automata , 2001, HSCC.

[18]  Hagen Völzer.  Randomized Non-sequential Processes , 2001, CONCUR.

[19]  T. Lindvall.  ON A ROUTING PROBLEM , 2004, Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences.

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

[21]  Peter Marwedel,et al.  Simple analysis of partial worst-case execution paths on general control flow graphs , 2013, 2013 Proceedings of the International Conference on Embedded Software (EMSOFT).

[22]  Bruno Gaujal,et al.  Blocking a transition in a free choice net and what it tells about its throughput , 2003, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[23]  Marta Z. Kwiatkowska,et al.  Advances in Probabilistic Model Checking , 2012, Software Safety and Security.

[24]  Lothar Thiele,et al.  The Complexity of Deadline Analysis for Workflow Graphs with Multiple Resources , 2016, BPM.

[25]  Hafedh Mili,et al.  Business process modeling languages: Sorting through the alphabet soup , 2010, CSUR.

[26]  Jana Koehler,et al.  The refined process structure tree , 2008, Data Knowl. Eng..