Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0106-y
DC FieldValue
dc.titleA rigorous methodology for specification and verification of business processes
dc.contributor.authorMasalagiu, C.
dc.contributor.authorChin, W.-N.
dc.contributor.authorAndrei, Ş.
dc.contributor.authorAlaiba, V.
dc.date.accessioned2013-07-04T07:50:09Z
dc.date.available2013-07-04T07:50:09Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.citationMasalagiu, C., Chin, W.-N., Andrei, Ş., Alaiba, V. (2009). A rigorous methodology for specification and verification of business processes. Formal Aspects of Computing 21 (5) : 495-510. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0106-y
dc.identifier.issn09345043
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/39812
dc.description.abstractBoth specification and verification of business processes are gaining more and more attention in the field. Most of the existing works in the last years are dealing with important, yet very specialized, issues. Among these, we can enumerate compensation constructs to cope with exceptions generated by long running business transactions, fully programmable fault and compensation handling mechanism, web service area, scope-based compensation and shared-labels for synchronization, and so on. The main purpose of this paper is to present a semi-automatized framework to describe and analyse business processes. Business analysts can now use a simple specification language (e.g., BPMN [Obj06]) to describe any type of activity in a company, in a concurrent and modular fashion. The associated programs (e.g., BPDs [Obj06]) have to be executed in an appropriate language (e.g., BPEL4WS [ACD+03]). Much more, they have to be confirmed to be sound, via some prescribed (a priori) conditions. We suggest how all the issues can be embedded in a unifying computer tool. We link our work with similar approaches and we justify our particular choices (besides BPMN and BPD): the TLA+ language for expressing the imposed behavioural conditions and Petri Nets ([EB87], [EB88]) to describe an intermediate semantics. In fact, we want to manage in an appropriate way the general relationship diagram (Fig. 1). Examples and case studies are provided. © 2009 British Computer Society.
dc.description.urihttp://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0106-y
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectBusiness process
dc.subjectSpecification
dc.subjectUnifying computer tool
dc.subjectVerification
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentCOMPUTER SCIENCE
dc.description.doi10.1007/s00165-009-0106-y
dc.description.sourcetitleFormal Aspects of Computing
dc.description.volume21
dc.description.issue5
dc.description.page495-510
dc.description.codenFACME
dc.identifier.isiut000269917500006
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.