A comparison of soundness results obtained by different approaches

2Citations
Citations of this article
4Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Business processes are often modelled using a language for which no semantics is standardized in a formal way. Examples for such languages are BPMN or Event-Driven Process Chains. The common way for reasoning about the soundness of such models is to define a formal semantics first by translating the model into a well-founded formalism (for example Petri-nets). Afterwards, formal reasoning methods can be applied on the obtained formal model. In the past years, several such semantics that give a formal meaning to BPMN or EPC models have been published. In this paper, we used a repository of almost 1,000 real-world EPC models and computed their soundness using three different tools. Those tools build on different semantics definitions: Kindler's fixed-point semantics, Mendling's state/context semantics and the YAWL semantics. While the soundness results for the majority of models were the same for all three tools, we identified a few interesting cases where the results differ. The results of our comparative study can lead to a better understanding of the differences between the semantics. © 2010 Springer-Verlag.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gruhn, V., & Laue, R. (2010). A comparison of soundness results obtained by different approaches. In Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing (Vol. 43 LNBIP, pp. 501–512). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12186-9_47

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free