SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Back-annotation of Simulation Traces with Change-Driven Model Transformations

Ábel Hegedüs, profile picture
Ábel Hegedüs

This document discusses using model transformations to back-annotate simulation traces onto business process models. It presents the challenges of mapping low-level simulation traces to higher-level process models due to information loss and granularity mismatches during modeling abstraction. The authors propose a change-driven transformation approach where the transformation is executed incrementally based on notifications of changes to the simulation model, rather than requiring manual initialization. This approach aims to better handle complex mapping issues that can arise, such as many-to-one and one-to-many mappings between model changes.

TechnologyDesign
1 of 77
Download to read offline
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
Back-annotation of Simulation Traces with Change-driven Model Transformations Ábel Hegedüs, Gábor Bergmann, István Ráth, Dániel Varró (hegedusa@mit.bme.hu) Budapest University of Technology and Economics Fault Tolerant Systems Research Group Budapest University of Technology and Economics Software Engineering and Formal Methods 2010, Pisa, Italy
Motivation - BPEL Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Will the business process assure this? Send reply
Outline of the talk  Motivation  Introduction – BPEL verification  Back-annotation problem  Transformation-driven Back-annotation  Summary  Future Work
Introduction  Quality of processes checked design-time to avoid malfunctioning due to design errors o using formal methods  Processes can not be checked directly o formal semantics not defined o model checking support missing  Transformation to some formal model is required o Petri Nets, Process algebra, Transition systems, etc.
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process
Verification of BPEL Receive request Business Requirement Process
Verification of BPEL Every received request must result in a reply! Business Requirement Process
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Model
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Model Formal model (Petri Nets)
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Model Formal model Token Transition Place (Petri Nets)
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process G [ Request => Transform Formalize F (Reply) ] Model Theorem Linear Temporal Logic formula
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem Check Model checker
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem Check Model checker Result
Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem Check Model checker Result Proved / Counter-example
Counter-example
Counter-example
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model Transition firing
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model Transition firing Model change
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace 100s of steps, Often several multiple changes/step o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools PNFiring trans Transition
Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools Bind output of simulator/model checker to the modeling framework using importers
Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics  Describe dynamic state of a process o Activity / Variable states o Events, triggers, variable manipulations  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics BPEL Activity • Not Startable  Describe dynamic state of a process • Startable • Running o Activity / Variable states • Finished • Interrupted o Events, triggers, variable manipulations  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics BPEL Activity Startable BPEL Activity Runs  Describe dynamic state of a process Activity Executed BPEL o Activity / Variable states o Events, triggers, variable manipulations  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics Static Metamodel  Describe dynamic state of a process o Activity / Variable states <<uses>> <<uses>> o Events, triggers, variable manipulations Trace Dynamic Metamodel Metamodel  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling <<uses>> approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
Abstraction gap  Lost information o Decision conditions o Variable values, parts o Timing (event ordering)  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
Abstraction gap  Lost information Delete Tokens o Decision conditions Add Tokens o Variable values, parts o Timing (event ordering)  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
Abstraction gap  Lost information Select Transition Delete Tokens o Decision conditions Fire Transition Add Tokens o Variable values, parts Select Transition o Timing (event ordering) Fire Transition  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
Abstraction gap  Lost information Select Transition BPEL Activity Startable Delete Tokens o Decision conditions Fire Transition BPEL Activity Add Tokens Runs o Variable values, parts Select Transition BPEL Activity o Timing (event ordering) Fire Transition Executed  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
Abstraction gap  Lost information o Decision conditions initial o Variable values, parts stop o Timing (event ordering)stopped Petri Net B2PN BPEL subnet Element  Granularity mismatch failed Traceability link o NOT 1-to-1 mapping final o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN Tr: Transition change trans trans PNF: PNFiring o Inspect the structure of the static model : Subnet B2PN • Graph patterns defined forBA: BPEL Activity matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
Trace mapping – simple changes initial 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PNstart stop change o Staticstopped traceability model generated during the structural transformation failed 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change final o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which BPEL Trace are affected by the PN change next o BPEL steptraceability model generated during the Static BPEL step structural transformation Activity Activity Activity 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN Startable next Runs Executed next change Change Change o Inspect the structure of the static model State State next • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
initial initial stop stop stopped inner stopped inner trans trans failed failed final final
Trace mapping – complex changes  Many-to-one: o Multiple PN changes one BPEL change o Transition firing represents internal behavior of a BPEL activity o Identify whether a PN change should be mapped  One-to-many o One PN change multiple BPEL changes o Persisted as substeps of a macro step in the trace  Interleaving o Parallel execution, relevant changes have to be selected o Petri Net subnets separate transitions
Trace mapping – complex changes  Many-to-one: o Multiple PN changes one BPEL change o Transition firing represents internal behavior of a BPEL activity o Identify whether a PN change should be mapped initial  One-to-many o One PN change multiple BPEL changes stop o Persisted as substeps of a macro step in the trace stopped inner  Interleaving trans failed o Parallel execution, relevant changes have to be selected o Petri Net subnets separate transitions final
Trace mapping – complex changes  Many-to-one: o Multiple PN changes one BPEL change o Transition firing represents internal behavior of a BPEL activity o Identify whether a PN change should be mapped  One-to-many o One PN change multiple BPEL changes o Persisted as substeps of a macro step in the trace  Interleaving o Parallel execution, relevant changes have to be selected o Petri Net subnets separate transitions
Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes • Process editor with only manipulation interface MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes Record model • Process editor with only manipulation interface changes MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes Traceability model • Process editor with only manipulation interface MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes Execute back- • Process editor with only manipulation interface annotation MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes • Process editor with only manipulation interface Apply MPN TR MBPEL changes map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, instead of manual initialization
Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, Step 1 Appear instead of manual initialization PNF: PNFiring Tr: Transition trans
Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, Step 1 2 Appear instead of manual initialization PNF: PNFiring Tr: Transition trans trans trans B2PN : Subnet Match BA: BPEL Activity
Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, 3 Step 1 2 Appear PNF: PNFiring instead of manual initialization PNF: PNFiring Tr: Transition Tr: Transition trans trans trans trans trans Create B2PN B2PN ::Subnet Subnet Match activity BA: BPEL Activity BA: BPEL Activity BAR: BPELActivityRuns
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation BPEL Trace next BPEL step BPEL step Activity Activity Activity Startable Runs Executed next next Change Change State State next
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality Hidden formal methods
Motivating scenario (cont.) Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Calculate Rating Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Returns with a web- service error Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Returns with a web- service error Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Not executed = Send reply No reply
Outlook: Scaling to large traces  Great part of the trace is irrelevant to the error  Process too complex for reasonable model checking resources (time, memory) o Decompose the process into smaller, interacting processes o Analysis of cooperating BPEL processes through abstraction of behavior
Summary  Reusable dynamic back-annotation approach: o With generic modeling framework for dynamic traces o Joint dynamic traceability metamodels o Transformation library • using the CDT design pattern  Motivating scenarios: o End-to-end verification approaches o BPEL to PN and Back o BPEL to SAL and Back (Tool demo)
Future work  Automatic generation of trace persistence rules from simulation rules  On-the-fly back-annotation  Derive mapping rules from forward transformation  ...  Thank you! Questions?  Come see our Tool Demo in Room 28!

More Related Content

PDF
Quality Control and Improvement in Manufacturing
SSA KPI
 
PDF
SLC Process for Software Development & Quality Control
MD ISLAM
 
PDF
NG BB 19 Document and Analyze the Process
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 15 MEASURE Roadmap
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 38 ANALYZE Tollgate
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 45 Quick Change Over
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 55 CONTROL Tollgate
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
Fcs - Encyclopedia
Arnaldo Colombo
 
Quality Control and Improvement in Manufacturing
SSA KPI
 
SLC Process for Software Development & Quality Control
MD ISLAM
 
NG BB 19 Document and Analyze the Process
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 15 MEASURE Roadmap
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 38 ANALYZE Tollgate
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 45 Quick Change Over
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 55 CONTROL Tollgate
Leanleaders.org
 
Fcs - Encyclopedia
Arnaldo Colombo
 

What's hot (19)

PPT
Op ex blueprint
Mark Kohler
 
PDF
NG BB 23 Measurement System Analysis - Introduction
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 05 Roles and Responsibilities
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 36 Simple Linear Regression
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 39 IMPROVE Roadmap
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 28 MEASURE Tollgate
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 06 Project Charter
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 22 Process Measurement
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 11 Power Steering
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
Value Reference Model - Information and Knowledge Mgt
Arnaldo Colombo
 
PDF
Improvement in Production Processes in a Company in the Electronics Sector us...
Thomas Schulz
 
PDF
NG BB 26 Control Charts
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 17 Takt Time
Leanleaders.org
 
DOC
Sample project requirements_checklist
srinivastadela
 
PDF
Altreonic methodology and solutions
omaraltreonic
 
PDF
NG BB 20 Data Collection
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 31 Cause and Effect (XY) Matrix
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 27 Process Capability
Leanleaders.org
 
PDF
NG BB 12 High-Level Process Map
Leanleaders.org
 
Op ex blueprint
Mark Kohler
 
NG BB 23 Measurement System Analysis - Introduction
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 05 Roles and Responsibilities
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 36 Simple Linear Regression
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 39 IMPROVE Roadmap
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 28 MEASURE Tollgate
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 06 Project Charter
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 22 Process Measurement
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 11 Power Steering
Leanleaders.org
 
Value Reference Model - Information and Knowledge Mgt
Arnaldo Colombo
 
Improvement in Production Processes in a Company in the Electronics Sector us...
Thomas Schulz
 
NG BB 26 Control Charts
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 17 Takt Time
Leanleaders.org
 
Sample project requirements_checklist
srinivastadela
 
Altreonic methodology and solutions
omaraltreonic
 
NG BB 20 Data Collection
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 31 Cause and Effect (XY) Matrix
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 27 Process Capability
Leanleaders.org
 
NG BB 12 High-Level Process Map
Leanleaders.org
 
Ad

Similar to Back-annotation of Simulation Traces with Change-Driven Model Transformations (20)

PDF
Design Time Validation for the Correct Execution of BPMN Collaborations
Jonas Anseeuw
 
PPTX
Business Process Simulation - How to get value out of it (bpm portugal 2013)
Denis Gagné
 
PPT
Static and Adaptive Bug Fix Patterns
Sung Kim
 
PDF
Developing and Visualizing Live Model Queries
Zoltán Ujhelyi
 
PPTX
ICSME14 - On the Impact of Refactoring Operations on Code Quality Metrics
Oscar Chaparro
 
PPTX
Linking Data and BPMN Processes to Achieve Executable Models
Xavier Oriol
 
PPTX
Steps in Simulation Study
Nalin Adhikari
 
PPT
Towards Service-based Business Process Modeling, Prototyping and Integration
Ang Chen
 
PPTX
Software Configuration Management
JeyanthiR
 
PDF
Harton-Presentation
Heather Harton
 
PPT
Toward Design, Modelling and Analysis of Dynamic Workflow Reconfiguration: a ...
Mazzara1976
 
PPTX
Process capability
padam nagar
 
PPTX
Innovative Engineering Workshop Npi 30march10
mccall1966
 
PDF
Innovation framework
James Basker
 
ODP
Multi-criteria meta-parameter tuning for mono-objective stochastic metaheuris...
guest78b81
 
PPT
Dill may-2008
Obsidian Software
 
PPT
1 Ads
lcbj
 
ODP
Flexible business processes using jBPM5
Kris Verlaenen
 
PDF
What Nobody's Telling You About Agile and DevOps
Tasktop
 
PDF
Data Analysis and Planning
iswaarlc
 
Design Time Validation for the Correct Execution of BPMN Collaborations
Jonas Anseeuw
 
Business Process Simulation - How to get value out of it (bpm portugal 2013)
Denis Gagné
 
Static and Adaptive Bug Fix Patterns
Sung Kim
 
Developing and Visualizing Live Model Queries
Zoltán Ujhelyi
 
ICSME14 - On the Impact of Refactoring Operations on Code Quality Metrics
Oscar Chaparro
 
Linking Data and BPMN Processes to Achieve Executable Models
Xavier Oriol
 
Steps in Simulation Study
Nalin Adhikari
 
Towards Service-based Business Process Modeling, Prototyping and Integration
Ang Chen
 
Software Configuration Management
JeyanthiR
 
Harton-Presentation
Heather Harton
 
Toward Design, Modelling and Analysis of Dynamic Workflow Reconfiguration: a ...
Mazzara1976
 
Process capability
padam nagar
 
Innovative Engineering Workshop Npi 30march10
mccall1966
 
Innovation framework
James Basker
 
Multi-criteria meta-parameter tuning for mono-objective stochastic metaheuris...
guest78b81
 
Dill may-2008
Obsidian Software
 
1 Ads
lcbj
 
Flexible business processes using jBPM5
Kris Verlaenen
 
What Nobody's Telling You About Agile and DevOps
Tasktop
 
Data Analysis and Planning
iswaarlc
 
Ad

More from Ábel Hegedüs (7)

PPT
Patching the gap in collaborating on models
Ábel Hegedüs
 
PPTX
Eclipse Neon Democamp Budapest - VIATRA 1.3 release
Ábel Hegedüs
 
PPTX
VIATRA 3: A Reactive Model Transformation Platform
Ábel Hegedüs
 
PPTX
Query-driven soft interconnection of EMF models
Ábel Hegedüs
 
PPTX
Model-driven framework for Guided Design Space Exploration presented at ASE 2011
Ábel Hegedüs
 
PPTX
Quick fix generation for DSMLs
Ábel Hegedüs
 
PPTX
Guided Trajectory Exploration of GT systems presented at PNGT 2010
Ábel Hegedüs
 
Patching the gap in collaborating on models
Ábel Hegedüs
 
Eclipse Neon Democamp Budapest - VIATRA 1.3 release
Ábel Hegedüs
 
VIATRA 3: A Reactive Model Transformation Platform
Ábel Hegedüs
 
Query-driven soft interconnection of EMF models
Ábel Hegedüs
 
Model-driven framework for Guided Design Space Exploration presented at ASE 2011
Ábel Hegedüs
 
Quick fix generation for DSMLs
Ábel Hegedüs
 
Guided Trajectory Exploration of GT systems presented at PNGT 2010
Ábel Hegedüs
 

Recently uploaded (20)

PPTX
Spectroscopy.pptx food analysis technology
nawahassan45
 
PDF
Agricultural_Statistics_at_a_Glance_2022_0.pdf
SandeepSingh286037
 
PDF
Profit Center Accounting in SAP S/4HANA, S4F28 Col11
Libreria ERP
 
PDF
Approach and Philosophy of On baking technology
30anthuong17
 
PDF
Architecting across the Boundaries of two Complex Domains - Healthcare & Tech...
Peter Tan
 
PDF
Review of recent advances in non-invasive hemoglobin estimation
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
KodekX | Application Modernization Development
KodekX
 
PPTX
VMware vSphere Foundation How to Sell Presentation-Ver1.4-2-14-2024.pptx
blackmambaettijean
 
PPTX
ACSFv1EN-58255 AWS Academy Cloud Security Foundations.pptx
23bcla24
 
PDF
Mobile App Security Testing_ A Comprehensive Guide.pdf
flufftailshop
 
PDF
Spectral efficient network and resource selection model in 5G networks
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
Machine learning based COVID-19 study performance prediction
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
Build a system with the filesystem maintained by OSTree @ COSCUP 2025
Jian-Hong Pan
 
PDF
Diabetes mellitus diagnosis method based random forest with bat algorithm
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
Dropbox Q2 2025 Financial Results & Investor Presentation
Dropbox
 
PDF
How UI/UX Design Impacts User Retention in Mobile Apps.pdf
SynapseIndia
 
PPT
Teaching material agriculture food technology
LiaRayya
 
PPTX
Cloud computing and distributed systems.
kkkkkhan
 
PDF
Unlocking AI with Model Context Protocol (MCP)
Brian McKeiver
 
PDF
Electronic commerce courselecture one. Pdf
OmerMohamed64
 
Spectroscopy.pptx food analysis technology
nawahassan45
 
Agricultural_Statistics_at_a_Glance_2022_0.pdf
SandeepSingh286037
 
Profit Center Accounting in SAP S/4HANA, S4F28 Col11
Libreria ERP
 
Approach and Philosophy of On baking technology
30anthuong17
 
Architecting across the Boundaries of two Complex Domains - Healthcare & Tech...
Peter Tan
 
Review of recent advances in non-invasive hemoglobin estimation
IAESIJAI
 
KodekX | Application Modernization Development
KodekX
 
VMware vSphere Foundation How to Sell Presentation-Ver1.4-2-14-2024.pptx
blackmambaettijean
 
ACSFv1EN-58255 AWS Academy Cloud Security Foundations.pptx
23bcla24
 
Mobile App Security Testing_ A Comprehensive Guide.pdf
flufftailshop
 
Spectral efficient network and resource selection model in 5G networks
IAESIJAI
 
Machine learning based COVID-19 study performance prediction
IAESIJAI
 
Build a system with the filesystem maintained by OSTree @ COSCUP 2025
Jian-Hong Pan
 
Diabetes mellitus diagnosis method based random forest with bat algorithm
IAESIJAI
 
Dropbox Q2 2025 Financial Results & Investor Presentation
Dropbox
 
How UI/UX Design Impacts User Retention in Mobile Apps.pdf
SynapseIndia
 
Teaching material agriculture food technology
LiaRayya
 
Cloud computing and distributed systems.
kkkkkhan
 
Unlocking AI with Model Context Protocol (MCP)
Brian McKeiver
 
Electronic commerce courselecture one. Pdf
OmerMohamed64
 

Back-annotation of Simulation Traces with Change-Driven Model Transformations

  • 1. Back-annotation of Simulation Traces with Change-driven Model Transformations Ábel Hegedüs, Gábor Bergmann, István Ráth, Dániel Varró (hegedusa@mit.bme.hu) Budapest University of Technology and Economics Fault Tolerant Systems Research Group Budapest University of Technology and Economics Software Engineering and Formal Methods 2010, Pisa, Italy
  • 2. Motivation - BPEL Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Will the business process assure this? Send reply
  • 3. Outline of the talk  Motivation  Introduction – BPEL verification  Back-annotation problem  Transformation-driven Back-annotation  Summary  Future Work
  • 4. Introduction  Quality of processes checked design-time to avoid malfunctioning due to design errors o using formal methods  Processes can not be checked directly o formal semantics not defined o model checking support missing  Transformation to some formal model is required o Petri Nets, Process algebra, Transition systems, etc.
  • 5. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process
  • 6. Verification of BPEL Receive request Business Requirement Process
  • 7. Verification of BPEL Every received request must result in a reply! Business Requirement Process
  • 8. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Model
  • 9. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Model Formal model (Petri Nets)
  • 10. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Model Formal model Token Transition Place (Petri Nets)
  • 11. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem
  • 12. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process G [ Request => Transform Formalize F (Reply) ] Model Theorem Linear Temporal Logic formula
  • 13. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem Check Model checker
  • 14. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem Check Model checker Result
  • 15. Verification of BPEL Business Requirement Process Transform Formalize Model Theorem Check Model checker Result Proved / Counter-example
  • 18. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model
  • 19. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model
  • 20. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model Transition firing
  • 21. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model Transition firing Model change
  • 22. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools
  • 23. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace 100s of steps, Often several multiple changes/step o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools
  • 24. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools PNFiring trans Transition
  • 25. Processing results  Counter-example = Execution Trace o Sequence of steps representing changes of the model  How can we use these textual results? o Model changes of dynamic properties – state change  Convert textual trace automatically into model o Integration of analysis and modeling tools Bind output of simulator/model checker to the modeling framework using importers
  • 26. Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics  Describe dynamic state of a process o Activity / Variable states o Events, triggers, variable manipulations  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
  • 27. Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics BPEL Activity • Not Startable  Describe dynamic state of a process • Startable • Running o Activity / Variable states • Finished • Interrupted o Events, triggers, variable manipulations  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
  • 28. Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics BPEL Activity Startable BPEL Activity Runs  Describe dynamic state of a process Activity Executed BPEL o Activity / Variable states o Events, triggers, variable manipulations  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
  • 29. Business Process Execution Traces  Missing dynamic semantics Static Metamodel  Describe dynamic state of a process o Activity / Variable states <<uses>> <<uses>> o Events, triggers, variable manipulations Trace Dynamic Metamodel Metamodel  Semantics definition driven by structural modeling <<uses>> approach  Dynamic and trace metamodels for BPEL
  • 30. Abstraction gap  Lost information o Decision conditions o Variable values, parts o Timing (event ordering)  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
  • 31. Abstraction gap  Lost information Delete Tokens o Decision conditions Add Tokens o Variable values, parts o Timing (event ordering)  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
  • 32. Abstraction gap  Lost information Select Transition Delete Tokens o Decision conditions Fire Transition Add Tokens o Variable values, parts Select Transition o Timing (event ordering) Fire Transition  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
  • 33. Abstraction gap  Lost information Select Transition BPEL Activity Startable Delete Tokens o Decision conditions Fire Transition BPEL Activity Add Tokens Runs o Variable values, parts Select Transition BPEL Activity o Timing (event ordering) Fire Transition Executed  Granularity mismatch o NOT 1-to-1 mapping o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
  • 34. Abstraction gap  Lost information o Decision conditions initial o Variable values, parts stop o Timing (event ordering)stopped Petri Net B2PN BPEL subnet Element  Granularity mismatch failed Traceability link o NOT 1-to-1 mapping final o Non-trivial mapping problems (interleaving)  Traceability requirements o PN elements grouped into subnets for simplifying the traceability model
  • 35. Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
  • 36. Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN Tr: Transition change trans trans PNF: PNFiring o Inspect the structure of the static model : Subnet B2PN • Graph patterns defined forBA: BPEL Activity matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
  • 37. Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
  • 38. Trace mapping – simple changes initial 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PNstart stop change o Staticstopped traceability model generated during the structural transformation failed 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change final o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
  • 39. Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which are affected by the PN change o Static traceability model generated during the structural transformation 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN change o Inspect the structure of the static model • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
  • 40. Trace mapping – simple changes 1. Identification of BPEL process elements which BPEL Trace are affected by the PN change next o BPEL steptraceability model generated during the Static BPEL step structural transformation Activity Activity Activity 2. Decide BPEL change type represented by the PN Startable next Runs Executed next change Change Change o Inspect the structure of the static model State State next • Graph patterns defined for matching to structure parts 3. Persist BPEL change into the hierarchy of the trace model o Use dynamic traceability model to record BPEL-PN trace correspondence
  • 41. initial initial stop stop stopped inner stopped inner trans trans failed failed final final
  • 42. Trace mapping – complex changes  Many-to-one: o Multiple PN changes one BPEL change o Transition firing represents internal behavior of a BPEL activity o Identify whether a PN change should be mapped  One-to-many o One PN change multiple BPEL changes o Persisted as substeps of a macro step in the trace  Interleaving o Parallel execution, relevant changes have to be selected o Petri Net subnets separate transitions
  • 43. Trace mapping – complex changes  Many-to-one: o Multiple PN changes one BPEL change o Transition firing represents internal behavior of a BPEL activity o Identify whether a PN change should be mapped initial  One-to-many o One PN change multiple BPEL changes stop o Persisted as substeps of a macro step in the trace stopped inner  Interleaving trans failed o Parallel execution, relevant changes have to be selected o Petri Net subnets separate transitions final
  • 44. Trace mapping – complex changes  Many-to-one: o Multiple PN changes one BPEL change o Transition firing represents internal behavior of a BPEL activity o Identify whether a PN change should be mapped  One-to-many o One PN change multiple BPEL changes o Persisted as substeps of a macro step in the trace  Interleaving o Parallel execution, relevant changes have to be selected o Petri Net subnets separate transitions
  • 45. Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes • Process editor with only manipulation interface MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
  • 46. Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes Record model • Process editor with only manipulation interface changes MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
  • 47. Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes Traceability model • Process editor with only manipulation interface MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
  • 48. Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes Execute back- • Process editor with only manipulation interface annotation MPN TR MBPEL map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
  • 49. Change-Driven Model Transformations  Transformation design pattern o Execution driven by changes in the model • Simulation trace – Sequence of model changes o Handles external models • Simulator / model checker with only notification of changes • Process editor with only manipulation interface Apply MPN TR MBPEL changes map CHMPN CHMBPEL IF MPN’ TR MBPEL’
  • 50. Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, instead of manual initialization
  • 51. Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, Step 1 Appear instead of manual initialization PNF: PNFiring Tr: Transition trans
  • 52. Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, Step 1 2 Appear instead of manual initialization PNF: PNFiring Tr: Transition trans trans trans B2PN : Subnet Match BA: BPEL Activity
  • 53. Back-annotation with CDT  Change history and trace metamodels o Low-level model manipulations are grouped to form micro and macro steps  Mapping issues easier to handle o Rules trigger only when appropriate changes occur in the model o Transformation is executed when changes happen, 3 Step 1 2 Appear PNF: PNFiring instead of manual initialization PNF: PNFiring Tr: Transition Tr: Transition trans trans trans trans trans Create B2PN B2PN ::Subnet Subnet Match activity BA: BPEL Activity BA: BPEL Activity BAR: BPELActivityRuns
  • 54. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation
  • 55. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation BPEL Trace next BPEL step BPEL step Activity Activity Activity Startable Runs Executed next next Change Change State State next
  • 56. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation
  • 57. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 58. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 59. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 60. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 61. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 62. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 63. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 64. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality
  • 65. Presentation of BPEL traces  Dynamic behavior requires dynamic presentation  Overlay dynamic information on static view o Graphical BPEL editor o Use colors/labels to display current state o Provide intuitive navigation in the trace  Integrate with analysis functionality Hidden formal methods
  • 66. Motivating scenario (cont.) Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 67. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 68. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Calculate Rating Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 69. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 70. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 71. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 72. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 73. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Returns with a web- service error Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Send reply
  • 74. Motivating scenario (cont.) Receive request Returns with a web- service error Event: Cancel Calculate Rating Rollback changes Accept? Yes No Throw Error Send offer Send rejection Requirement: Receive answer Receive Every received request update request must result in a reply! No Yes Update? Not executed = Send reply No reply
  • 75. Outlook: Scaling to large traces  Great part of the trace is irrelevant to the error  Process too complex for reasonable model checking resources (time, memory) o Decompose the process into smaller, interacting processes o Analysis of cooperating BPEL processes through abstraction of behavior
  • 76. Summary  Reusable dynamic back-annotation approach: o With generic modeling framework for dynamic traces o Joint dynamic traceability metamodels o Transformation library • using the CDT design pattern  Motivating scenarios: o End-to-end verification approaches o BPEL to PN and Back o BPEL to SAL and Back (Tool demo)
  • 77. Future work  Automatic generation of trace persistence rules from simulation rules  On-the-fly back-annotation  Derive mapping rules from forward transformation  ...  Thank you! Questions?  Come see our Tool Demo in Room 28!