Multiparty Contracts: Agreeing and Implementing Interorganizational Processes

Aalst, Wil M. P. van der; Lohmann, Niels; Massuthe, Peter; Stahl, Christian; Wolf, Karsten

doi:10.1093/comjnl/bxn064

Cited by 103 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To achieve goals of a collaborative process, all organizations in the collaboration must develop and agree on a mutual contract for them to progressively operate towards the goals [3]. Here, we model artifact-centric processes by using the Artifact-Centric Collaboration Model [2] and the view-based approach presented in [1].…”

Section: Artifact-centric Collaboration Execution Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Workflow Execution Platform for Collaborative Artifact-Centric Business Processes

Yongchareon

Ngamakeur

Liu

et al. 2014

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2014 Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.To execute an artifact-centric process model, current workflow execution approaches require it to be converted to some existing executable language (e.g., BPEL) in order to run on a workflow system. We argue that the transformation can incur losses of information and degrade traceability. In this paper, we proposed and developed a workflow execution platform that directly executes a collaborative (i.e., inter-organizational) workflow specification of artifact-centric business processes without performing model conversion.

show abstract

Section: Artifact-centric Collaboration Execution Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Workflow Execution Platform for Collaborative Artifact-Centric Business Processes

Yongchareon

Ngamakeur

Liu

et al. 2014

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2014 Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following [21] we introduce a notion of refinement (called accordance in [21]) between two LPNs. We say that M (with a property M M ) is a strategy for an LPN N (with a property M) if N ⊕ M is weakly terminating.…”

Section: Proposition 6 For Two Compatible Lpnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Physical contracts take inspiration mainly from formalisms for concurrent systems (e.g. Petri nets [21], event structures [15,5], and various sorts of process algebras [8,9,10,12,16]), and they allow to describe the interaction of services in terms of response to events, message exchanges, etc. On the other side, logical contracts are typically expressed as formulae of suitable logics, which take inspiration and extend e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several papers, e.g. [9,10,11,16,21], address the issue of relating properties of a choreography with properties of the services which implement it (e.g. deadlock freedom, communication error freedom, session fidelity), in some cases providing automatic tools to project the choreography to a set services which correctly implements it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…LPNs preserve one of the main results of [21], i.e. the possibility of proving that an application respects a choreography, by only locally verifying the services which compose it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Lending Petri Nets and Contracts

Bartoletti¹,

Cimoli²,

Pinna³

2013

Fundamentals of Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Choreography-based approaches to service composition typically assume that, after a set of services has been found which correctly play the roles prescribed by the choreography, each service respects his role. Honest services are not protected against adversaries. We propose a model for contracts based on an extension of Petri nets, which allows services to protect themselves while still realizing the choreography. We relate this model with Propositional Contract Logic, by showing a translation of formulae into our Petri nets which preserves the logical notion of agreement, and allows for compositional verification.

show abstract

Static analysis and process model transformation for an advanced business process to Petri net mapping

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryVerification of business processes typically relies on Petri net-based process models. While they allow for natural modeling and analysis of aspects such as parallelism and message exchange, such a process model is seldom complete and precise. This is mainly because the available techniques for deriving a Petri net model from the original model neglect process data in favor of feasible verification. In this paper, we present an approach for deriving more precise process models by leveraging a process-to-Petri-net compiler, which takes as input a business process and generates as output a Petri net model for the process. This can be subsequently used for verification. However, in contrast to a conventional compiler, our compiler's objective is not to create the most efficient code but rather to produce a most precise but still effectively verifiable Petri net-based process model.

show abstract

Multiparty Contracts: Agreeing and Implementing Interorganizational Processes

Cited by 103 publications

References 8 publications

A Workflow Execution Platform for Collaborative Artifact-Centric Business Processes

A Workflow Execution Platform for Collaborative Artifact-Centric Business Processes

Lending Petri Nets and Contracts

Static analysis and process model transformation for an advanced business process to Petri net mapping

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About