Abstract
Most workflow tools support structured workflows despite the fact that unstructured workflows can be more expressive. The reason for this is that unstructured workflows are more prone to errors. In this paper, we describe a taxonomy that serves as a framework for analyzing unstructured workflows. The taxonomy organizes unstructured workflows in terms of two considerations: improper nesting and mismatched split-join pairs. Based on this taxonomy we characterize situations that are well-behaved and others that are not. We also discuss well-behaved unstructured workflows that have equivalent structured mappings. Finally, we also introduce a relaxed notion of correctness called quasi-equivalence that is based on one-directional bisimulation. The results of our research will be useful for researchers investigating expressiveness and correctness issues in unstructured workflows.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of Petri nets to workflow management. The journal of Circuits, Systems and Computes 7(1), 21–66 (1997)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Hofstede, B.: Verification of Workflow Task Structures: A Petri-net- based approach. Information Systems 25(1), 43–69 (2000)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Hofstede, A.H.M., ter Kiepuszewski, B., Barro, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(3), 5–51 (2003)
Bi, H., Zhao, L.: Process logic for verifying the correctness of business process models. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2004), Washington, D.C, (December 12-15, 2004)
Georgakopoulos, D., Hornick, M.: An Overview of Workflow Management From Process Modeling to Workflow Automation Infrastructure. Distributed and Parallel Database 3, 119–153 (1995)
Kiepuszewski, B., Hofstede, A.H.M., Bussler, C.: On Structured Workflow Modeling. In: Wangler, B., Bergman, L.D. (eds.) CAiSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1789, p. 431. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPTflex—Supporting dynamic changes of workflows without losing control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems—Special Issue on Workflow Managament 10(2), 93–129 (1998)
Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.E.: On correctness issues in conceptual modeling of workflows. In: Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 1997), Cork, Ireland, June 19-21, pp. 943–964 (1997)
Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.E.: Analyzing process models using graph reduction techniques. Information Systems 25(2), 117–134 (2000)
Verbeek, H.M.W., Basten, T., Van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Diagnosing Workflow Processes using Woflan. The Computer Journal 44(4), 246–279 (2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Liu, R., Kumar, A. (2005). An Analysis and Taxonomy of Unstructured Workflows. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds) Business Process Management. BPM 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3649. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11538394_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11538394_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-28238-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31929-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)