On Structured Workflow Modelling

By Bartek Kiepuszewski, A. T. Hofstede, Christoph Bussler. International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 2000

349 citations recorded by the source corpus.

While there are many similarities between the languages of the various workflow management systems, there are also significant differences. One particular area of differences is caused by the fact that different systems impose different syntactic restrictions. In such cases, business analysts have to choose between either conforming to the language in their specifications or transforming these specifications afterwards. The latter option is preferable as this allows for a separation of concerns. In this paper we investigate to what extent such transformations are possible in the context of various syntactical restrictions (the most restrictive of which will be referred to as structured workflows). We also provide a deep insight into the consequences, particularly in terms of expressive power, of imposing such restrictions.

Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications, Information Systems and Management, Management Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9ca92e32a4ca5bcfb783ef2285ae4b766310be34

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computer Networks and Communications

In Information Systems and Management

In Management Information Systems

Citations in the corpus

Enabling Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems (2012, background): “In many cases, unstructured process models can be transformed into blockstructured ones [15, 143, 246, 370].”
E-services: a look behind the curtain (2003, background): “Reference [23] shows in the simplified context of structured workflows [46] how such runtime descriptions can be exploited to predict future behavior of the execution, such as whether a variable will be subsequently overwritten.”
QoS-aware middleware for Web services composition (2004, background): “However, they do apply for statecharts since in statecharts it is not possible to have arbitrary transitions going from a parallel branch to another such as those put forward by reference [19].”
Correctness criteria for dynamic changes in workflow systems - a survey (2004, methodology): “According to [15] we classify those meta models with respect to their operational semantics and the evaluation strategies applied for executing WF instances during runtime.”
Analysis of Web Services Composition Languages: The Case of BPEL4WS (2003, background): “Note that there exist non-structured cycles that cannot be unfolded into structured ones [15].”
Workflow Patterns (2003, background): “An analysis of such conversions and an identification of some situations where they cannot be done can be found in [29].”
YAWL: yet another workflow language (2005, result): “While the results reported in [7] mainly refer to suitability, the results in [13,32,33] consider formal expressiveness.”