Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Search
Abstract state machine nets: closing the gap between business process models and their implementation
Börger E., Fleischmann A.  S-BPM ONE 2015 (Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Subject-Oriented Business Process Management, Kiel, Germany, Apr 23-24, 2015)1-10.2015.Type:Proceedings
Date Reviewed: Aug 6 2015

Process automation has seen many unsuccessful attempts to bridge the gap between requirements specification by domain experts and technical implementation by software developers. This so-called ground model problem is a direct result of the (in general) imprecise, inconsistent, or incorrect process models that only partially or erroneously cover the requirements of the to-be-implemented software artifacts. Even though the paper provides an interesting approach to this problem, it is unfortunately not convincing.

The authors introduce abstract state machines (ASMs) as basic constructs for modeling the flow of activities in a process. An ASM consists of one or more inputs (entries, described by entry conditions), a body where the actual computation of a process step happens, and one or more outputs (exits, described by exit conditions). Larger processes are created by linking exit conditions of one ASM with the entry conditions of another ASM. By preserving entry and exit conditions, one may also hierarchically refine the body of an ASM into more complex flows.

The paper also shows (in really great length) that this is sufficient to model the subject-oriented approach to business process management (S-BPM) and, most probably, the case management model and notation (CMMN) standard currently in development. Additionally, the authors also address how to demonstrate (requirements) model correctness, completeness, and consistency within this approach.

A really enlightening epistemological introduction highlights the need to provide a full model, not only covering process flow, but also including data, resources, and other environmental conditions (for example, security, authentication, and user interfaces) to solve the ground model problem.

Sadly, however, the paper falls into the very same trap it has (rightfully) identified as the root cause for the current (deplorable) state of affairs; like many other unsuccessful attempts, it only focuses on modeling the flow logic of a business process.

Therefore, I recommend ignoring this approach for the moment, unless you are interested in ASMs or S-BPM in particular, and wait for future refinements of this approach (or others) to close the business/information technology (IT) divide.

Reviewer:  Christoph F. Strnadl Review #: CR143673 (1510-0888)
Bookmark and Share
  Reviewer Selected
Featured Reviewer
 
 
Evolutionary Prototyping (D.2.2 ... )
 
 
Modeling Methodologies (I.6.5 ... )
 
 
Organizational Design (H.5.3 ... )
 
 
Process Models (F.3.2 ... )
 
 
Synchronous Interaction (H.5.3 ... )
 
Would you recommend this review?
yes
no
Other reviews under "Evolutionary Prototyping": Date
Advances in evolutionary computing: theory and applications
Ghosh A., Tsutsui S. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, NY,2003. Type: Divisible Book
Feb 3 2004
Smoothness, ruggedness and neutrality of fitness landscapes: from theory to application
Vassilev V., Fogarty T., Miller J. In Advances in evolutionary computing. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 2003. Type: Book Chapter
Oct 21 2003
Fast evolutionary algorithms
Yao X., Liu Y., Liang K., Lin G. In Advances in evolutionary computing. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 2003. Type: Book Chapter
Oct 20 2003
more...

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright 1999-2024 ThinkLoud®
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy