Collaboration and Interoperability Support for Agile Enterprises in a Networked World

Transcription

1 Collaboration and Interoperability Support for Agile Enterprises in a Networked World Emerging Scenarios, Research Challenges, Enabling Technologies Manfred Reichert Manfred Reichert IWEI 13 Keynote 28 March 2013 Enschede

2 Page 2 Motivation Process-Aware Information Systems (PAIS) Flexible PAIS Enabling Flexibility for Cross-Organizational Processes Some Technical Insights

3 Page 3 Motivation Current situation in many enterprises: users interact with monolithic, function-centric application systems processes only in the users minds with only partial knowledge of the process

4 Page 4 Motivation Vision of SOA modulurization of invokable application functions ( services )

5 Page 5 Motivation Vision of SOA modulurization of invokable application functions ( services ) S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6 S 7 S 8 S 9 S 10 S 11 S 12

6 Page 6 Motivation Vision of SOA modulurization of invokable application functions ( services ) combined by explicitly defined processes whose execution is supported by a process-aware information system Process-Aware Information System S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6 S 7 S 8 S 9 S 10 S 11 S 12

7 Page 7 Motivation Goals of SOA improving process quality increasing flexibility? Process-Aware Information System S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6 S 7 S 8 S 9 S 10 S 11 S 12

8 Page 8 Motivation Environmental changes require new or adapted services... which must be integrated with the EIS Compliance Regulations! Emerging Standards Mergers New Products Mobile Apps M-Commerce Supply Chain Mgmt. Sustainability Web Services Auditing The agile enterprise should be able to rapidly set up and implement new business processes, quickly adapt existing business processes to changing needs flexibly intervene into the execution of single process instances (i.e., business cases) whenever required flexibly interact with partners and customers Need for Flexible Process- Aware Information Systems

9 Page 9 Motivation Process-Aware Information Systems (PAIS) Flexible PAIS Enabling Flexibility for Cross-Organizational Processes Some Technical Insights

10 Page 10 PAIS: Build-Time Issues Process Schema S Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation x + Activity -Split/Join AND-Split/Join clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes MRT + + Sonography x Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatmentt x Process Instance I1 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 1 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, X-ray > Process Instance I2 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 2 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, Non Operative Therapy > Activity States: Activated Completed Skipped

11 Page 11 PAIS: Process Compliance Process Compliance Discharge patient G(Admit_patient (not Release_patient U Make_next_appointment)) Admit patient Make next appointment Discharge patient Guideline: After admission, a patient should not be discharged without making the appointment for his next visit.

12 Page 12 PAIS: Process Compliance SeaFlows Project Some Impressions The activities CT and Inform patient are on different branches of an -Block 12

13 Page 13 Process model to be checked Generated counterexample: Execution path and corresponding process context violating the constraint 13

14 Page 14 Compliance Violation Make next appointment Release patient Admit patient Make next appointment Release patient PAIS: Levels of Correctness Inconsistency Deadlock Lifelock Semantic Correctness (Business Process Compliance) Impossible Data-flow Behavioral Correctness (Soundness) Syntactical Correctness Missing End Event Wrong Flows

15 Page 15 PAIS: Runtime Components Process-aware Information System (PAIS) Late Modeling Web Clnt API Admin. API Msg Queuing Instance 4 Instance 3 Instance 2 Instance 1 Validatíon Process Execution Engine Instance 6 Instance 5 Modeling API Authorization Instance 11 Instance 10 Instance 9 Instance 8 Instance 7 Dyn. Change API Time Mgmt Exceptions Audit Trail... Instance 14 Instance 13 Instance 12 Process Composer Create Process Schema Modify Process Schema Check Process Schema Process Repository Application Component s Process Schemas Applicationen / Application Server... Users Process Engineer

16 Page 16 PAIS: The Process Lifecycle Schema S : B Schema S: A x C B x A x D C x E D Weber, B., Mutschler, B., Reichert, M. (2010) Investigating the Effort of Using Business Process Management Technology: Results from a Controlled Experiment. Science of Computer Programming, 75(5): Process engineer / Process administrator Process Monitoring Execution Log Create Instances Instance I 1 Instance I 1 B Instance I 1 B A x CB x E A x C x E A x C x E D D D Process Execution Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant Process Modeling Process Configuration & Implementation Process Execution Process Monitoring

17 Page 17 Motivation Process-Aware Information Systems (PAIS) Flexible PAIS Enabling Flexibility for Cross-Organizational Processes Some Technical Insights

18 Page 18 Flexible PAIS: Enabling the Agile Enterprise Good idea! Let it be the new process version! Migrate running instances? Process-aware Information System Deal with conflicts between ad-hoc and changes of the version Running Instances / Process Engine Process Models Process Logs

19 Page 19 Flexible PAIS: Required Lifecycle Support Process engineer / Process administrator Need for Process Evolution Execution Log Process Need Monitoring for Monitoring and Analyzing Dynamic Processes Schema S : B Schema S: A x C A B x x D C x E Create Instances Instance I 1 Instance I 1 B Instance I 1 B A x CB x E A x C x E A x C x E D D D D Need for Process Variant Configuration Process Execution Need for Ad-hoc Deviations Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P. (2010) Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems. LNCS Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency, Vol. 2, pp

20 Page 20 Ad-hoc Changes Examinations U Wallace, Edgar U Miller, Anne Examination Check Anesthesiology Exceptional case we need an additional lab test! U Smith, Karl U Jones, Isabelle X-Ray Explanation Operation Risks Lab Test The Users' View Reichert, Manfred and Dadam, Peter (1998) ADEPTflex-Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows Without Losing Control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, Special Issue on Workflow Management Systems, 10(2): , Kluwer

21 Page 21 Ad-hoc Changes Process Type Level System s View Process Schema S Non Operative Therapy Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x x + Activity -Split/Join AND-Split/Join Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment Process Instance Level Process Instance I1 x + + x x x Process Instance I2 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 1 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, X-ray > Execution Trace: σ 2 = < Patient Admission > Reichert, Manfred and Dadam, Peter (1998) ADEPTflex-Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows Without Losing Control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, Special Issue on Workflow Management Systems, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp

22 Page 22 Ad-hoc Changes Process Type Level System s View Process Schema S Non Operative Therapy Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation x + Activity -Split/Join AND-Split/Join clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x Sonography For patient Mozart the MRT Initial Treatment & activity Operative Treatment Operation Planning needs to be skipped due to his cardiac pacemaker. cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Process Instance Level Process Instance I1 x + + x x x Process Instance I2 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 1 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, X-ray > Execution Trace: σ 2 = < Patient Admission > Reichert, Manfred and Dadam, Peter (1998) ADEPTflex-Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows Without Losing Control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, Special Issue on Workflow Management Systems, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp

23 Page 23 Ad-hoc Changes Process Type Level System s View Process Schema S Non Operative Therapy Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x x + Activity -Split/Join AND-Split/Join Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment Process Instance Level Process Instance I1 x + + x x x Process Instance I2 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 1 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, X-ray > Execution Trace: σ 2 = < Patient Admission > Reichert, Manfred and Dadam, Peter (1998) ADEPTflex-Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows Without Losing Control. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, Special Issue on Workflow Management Systems, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp

24 Page 24 Ad-hoc Changes Change Patterns Weber, Barbara and Reichert, Manfred and Rinderle-Ma, Stefanie (2008) Change Patterns and Change Support Features - Enhancing Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 66(3): , Elsevier Science

25 Page 25 Ad-hoc Changes Change Correctness Process Type Level Process Schema S Non Operative Therapy Patient Admission Anamnesis & Clinical Examination x X-ray Non Operative Therapy 1 x Discharge & Documentation clinicalsuspicionof CruciateRupture = Yes + MRT + x x x + Activity -Split/Join AND-Split/Join Sonography Initial Treatment & Operation Planning cruciaterupture = Yes and operationindicated = Yes Operative Treatment Process Instance Level Process Instance I3 x + + x x x Execution Trace: σ 3 = < Patient Admission, Anamnesis & Clinical Examination, MRT, X-ray, Sonography > I3 is not compliant with change Delete (I3, MRT) Rinderle, Stefanie and Reichert, Manfred (2004) Correctness Criteria for Dynamic Changes in Workflow Systems: A Survey. Data & Knowledge Engineering, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp

26 Page 26 Ad-hoc Changes The ADEPT Framework a) b) c) A A A B NT= NULL A B X C jumpforward(cfs instance, G, J,...) B C E H Insert X between DE F G G M J K N skip before = {C, D}and M after = {F} I D n target n sync F Solution for many fundamental research issues! Step 2: Insert X parallel to this block Nachholbereich C Step 1: Determine minimal X block NT = NULL B E H NT = NULL MinBlock CFS ({C, D, F}) A D G J K C n 1 C n I target n 2 n sync A B E F F G A B E F G n begin Formal D n end foundation NT= NULL of D the NT= NULL NS = ACTIVATED Step 3: Insert sync ADEPT edges technology! H Step 4: Apply reduction NS rules = RUNNING G NS = COMPLETED ET = SOFT_SYNC_E X n I ES = TRUE_SIGNALED X target n 2 C B D C F D E ET=SOFT_SYNC_E E F NT= NULL n 1 G AJ n sync B C D K E Reichert, F GManfred and Dadam, Peter and Bauer, Thomas (2003) Dealing with forward and backward jumps in workflow management systems. Int'l Journal Software and Systems Modeling (SOSYM), 2(1): 37-58

27 Page 27 Flexible PAIS: Process Schema Evolution Process engineer / Process administrator Need for Process Evolution Process Monitoring Execution Log Schema S : B Schema S: A x C B x A x D C x E D Create Instances Instance I 1 Instance I 1 B Instance I 1 B A x CB x E A x C x E A x C x E D D D Process Execution Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant

28 Page 28 Process Schema Evolution The User s View ADEPT Process Management System Std Client APIWeb Clnt APIModeling API Dyn. Change API Admin. API Role Mgmt Authorization Time Mgmt Msg Queuing Recovery Audit Trail... Process 4 Process 3 Process 2 Process 1 Process Engine Process 6 Process 5 Process 11 Process 10 Process 9 Process 8 Process 7 Process 14 Process 13 Process 12 ADEPT Process Composer Create Process Template Modify Process Template Check Process Template... Repository Process Application Templates Components Anwendungen / Application Server... Users instances can be automatically migrated instances have proceeded too far 123 instances cannot be automatically migrated Process Designer / Process Administrator

29 Page 29 Process Schema Evolution The System s View Fundamental Question: Under Which Conditions is a Migration Possible? Schema S: confirm order pack goods S : make invoice confirm order invoice pack goods send invoice I 1 : get order collect data deliver goods get order compose order migrate collect data compose order deliver goods I 2 : migrate I n : migrate Process instance not state compliant with S' (remains being executed according to S) Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, Peter (2004) Flexible Support of Team Processes by Adaptive Workflow Systems. Distributed and Parallel Databases, 16(1):

30 Page 30 Process Schema Evolution The System s View Increased Complexity: Interplay with Ad-hoc Changes Schema S: confirm order pack goods S : make invoice confirm order invoice pack goods send invoice get order I 1 : collect data deliver goods get order compose order migrate collect data compose order deliver goods I 2 : X X X Ad-hoc Change migrate? Indispensable: General, Formal Correctness Criterion I n : migrate Analogy: DBMS Concurrency Control "Serializability Principle" Process instance not compliant with S' Rinderle, S., Reichert, M., Dadam, P. (2004) Disjoint and Overlapping Process Changes: Challenges, Solutions, Applications. In: Proc. CooplS'04, Agia Napa, LNCS 3290,, pp

31 Page 31 Flexble PAIS: Extended Process Lifecycle Support Schema S : B Schema S: A x C B x A x D C x E D Process engineer / Process administrator Process Monitoring Execution Log Change Log Create Instances Change Propagation Instance I 1 Instance I 1 B Instance I 1 B A x CB x E A x C x E A x C x E D D D Process Execution Instancespecific Change Exception: Delete (I 1, E) Arbeitsliste Tätigkeit 1 Tätigkeit 2 Tätigkeit 3 Tätigkeit 4 Process participant Weber, B., Sadiq, S., Reichert, M. (2009) Beyond Rigidity - Dynamic Process Lifecycle Support: A Survey on Dynamic Changes in Process-aware Information Systems. Computer Science - Research and Development, 23(2): 47-65, Springer.

32 Page 32 Flexble PAIS: The ADEPT Framework (Formal) Process Meta Model Process Fragment Composition Process Type Changes Architecture And Implementation Ad-hoc Changes Response Times Propagation of Process Type Changes User Interface / API Transactional Support / Semantic Rollback Support of Temporal Constraints Efficient Execution Componentorientied Software Development Scalability / Distributed Process Mgmt Dadam, Peter and Reichert, Manfred (2009) The ADEPT Project: A Decade of Research and Development for Robust and Flexible Process Support - Challenges and Achievements. Computer Science - Research and Development, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp

33 Page 33 Flexble PAIS: The ADEPT Framework (Formal) Process Meta Model Process Fragment Composition Process Type Changes Architecture And Implementation Ad-hoc Changes Response Times Propagation of Process Type Changes User Interface / API Transactional Support / Semantic Rollback Support of Temporal Constraints Efficient Execution Componentorientied Software Development Scalability / Distributed Process Mgmt Dadam, Peter and Reichert, Manfred (2009) The ADEPT Project: A Decade of Research and Development for Robust and Flexible Process Support - Challenges and Achievements. Computer Science - Research and Development, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp

34 Page 34 Flexble PAIS: The ADEPT Framework (Formal) Process Meta Model Process Fragment Composition Process Type Changes Architecture And Implementation Ad-hoc Changes Response Times Propagation of Process Type Changes User Interface / API Transactional Support / Semantic Rollback Support of Temporal Constraints Efficient Execution Componentorientied Software Development Scalability / Distributed Process Mgmt Dadam, Peter and Reichert, Manfred (2009) The ADEPT Project: A Decade of Research and Development for Robust and Flexible Process Support - Challenges and Achievements. Computer Science - Research and Development, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp

35 Page 35 Flexible PAIS: Clinical Pathway Support Patient is pregnant; process variant pregnacy is chosen Flexible Support of Clinical Pathways with ADEPT Partners: Jan Neuhaus, Claudia Reuter Fraunhoferinstitut Dortmund Increased blood sugar level; process variant Diabetes is chosen New process fragments are inserted in parallel!

36 Page 36 Flexible PAIS: Disaster Management Process-aware, Cooperative Emergency Management for Water Infrastructures Partner: TU Darmstadt A. Wagenknecht; U. Rüppel: Improving Resource Management In Flood Response With Process Models and Web GIS. In: 16th TIEMS Conf., 2009

37 Page 37 Flexible PAIS: E/E Engineering Partner: Daimler AG

38 Page 38 Flexible PAIS: Transfering ADEPT to Practice The AristaFlow BPM Suite AristaFlow BPM Suite

39 Page 39 Flexible PAIS: Book

40 Page 40 Motivation Process-Aware Information Systems (PAIS) Flexible PAIS Enabling Flexibility for Cross-Organizational Processes Some Technical Insights

41 Page 41 Enabling Flexibility for Cross-Organizational Processes Cross-Organizational Processes Business Process Compliance Change / Flexibility Process-aware Information System Running Instances / Process Engine Process Models Process Logs Combining these areas raises numerous challenges.

42 Page 42 Cross-Organizational Processes

43 Page 43 Cross-Organizational Processes

44 Page 44 Cross-Organizational Processes

45 Page 45 Cross-Organizational Processes

46 Page 46 Cross- Organizational Processes Cross-organizational Processes

47 Page 47 Cross- Organizational Processes

48 Page 48 Cross-Organizational Processes: Correctness Compatibility 48

49 Page 49 Cross-Organizational Processes: Correctness Conformance 49

50 Page 50 Cross-Organizational Processes: Correctness Cross-organizational Compliance 50

51 Page 51 Cross-Organizational Processes: Change Which running instances can switch to the new version?

52 Page 52 Motivation Process-Aware Information Systems (PAIS) Flexible PAIS Enabling Flexibility for Cross-Organizational Processes Some Technical Insights

53 Page 53 Basic Foundations A-->B B-->C A-->B B-->C A-->B B-->C C-->D C-->D C-->B D-->E C-->B D-->E C-->B E-->B E-->B E-->B Global Choreography Model Model Abstraction Public View of Partner B

54 Page 54 Partner B Basic Foundations Partner A A-->B A-->B B-->C C-->B E-->B Partner E Compatibility Partner C B-->C D-->E E-->B Partner D C-->B C-->D C-->D D-->E

55 Page 55 consistent with? Basic Foundations Public View Private View Receive A Private activities, e.g., data transformation a1 A-->B B-->C Send C Receive C AND C-->B E-->B a2 Receive E AND a3 a4 Public View of Partner B Private View of Partner B

56 Page 56 Basic Foundations Public Views Partner B Private View Partner A Partner A A-- >B C-- >B A-- >B B-- >C XO R XO R E-- >B Private View Partner B A-->B B-->C Partner E Partner C Private View Partner E XO R XO R D-- >E E-->B Compatibility C-- >B B-- >C XO R XO R C-->D Private View Partner C C-->B C-->D D-->E Partner D E-->B Private View Partner D Consistency XO R XO R C-- >D D-- >E Global Schema Global Choreography Model

57 Page 57 Basic Foundations - Ok! and what is the problem then? Consistency Public Views Partner B Partner A Private View Consistency Partner A Private View B->C A->B Partner B E->B C->B Sending message which will not be consumed XO R Structural compatibility Partner C XO R Transitivity effects B->C D->E Compatibility C->B XO R C-->D XO R Partner D Private View Partner D Private View XO R E-->B Partner E Waiting for a message which will never arrive XO R Partner E Private View Behavioral Compatibility A->B XO R C->D D->E XO R Consistency Partner C Negotiation

58 Page 58 Change Propagation Choreography Model + Public views + Change Specification Partners affected by the change + Changes to be propagated - Preserve Consistency - Preserve Compatibility - Transitive effects - Negotiation

59 Page 59 Change Propagation: Negotiation Start Specify change Infer interaction changes Variant? No Yes Compute affected partners Do Propagate changes public2private Update local change Select an affected partner Update global choreography model Succeed Succeed Find another alternative No Update local choreography models Fail End Fail Yes abandon? Compute changes to propagate to this partner ok? Yes No No Check compatibility and consitency Compute public2private changes Yes negociations succeed? Negotiate changes Yes last partner? No

60 Page 60 Change Propagation: Change Patterns INSERT(fragment, how, in, out) inserts a new fragment in a process model. DELETE(fragment) Deletes an existing fragment from a process model. REPLACE(oldFragment, newfragment) Replaces an existing fragment by a new one in the process model. UPDATE(activity, attribute, newvalue) Updates the attributes of a single activity of a process model. Attribute could be: partner, role, input, output, etc.

61 Page 61 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern consistent with? Public View Private View Receive A a1 A-->B B-->C Send C Receive C AND C-->B E-->B a2 Receive E AND a3 a4 Public View of Partner B Private View of Partner B

62 Page 62 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern a5 AND a1 Send C AND Private View Public View Receive BA a1 Send C r9 A-->B B-->C Receive C AND a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

63 Folie 62 r9 recieve a reichert;

64 Page 63 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern AND a5 AND Abstraction AND Send C a1 Send C AND Private View Public View Receive AB a1 Send C Abstraction Send C A-->B B-->C Receive C AND a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

65 Page 64 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern AND a5 AND Abstraction AND Send C Reduction Rules a1 Send C AND Send C Private View Public View Receive AB a1 Send C Abstraction Send C A-->B B-->C Receive C AND a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

66 Page 65 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern AND a5 AND Abstraction AND Send C Reduction Rules a1 Send C AND Send C INVARIANT! Private View Public View Receive AB a1 Send C Abstraction Send C A-->B B-->C Receive C AND a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

67 Page 66 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern a0 Send E a1 Receive E Send C Private View Public View Receive BA a1 Send C Receive C AND A-->B B-->C a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

68 Page 67 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern a0 Send E Send E a1 Abstraction Reduction rules Receive E Send C Receive E Send C Private View Public View Receive AB a1 Send C Abstraction Send C A-->B B-->C Receive C AND a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

69 Page 68 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern a0 Send E Send E a1 Abstraction Reduction rules Receive E Send C Receive E Send C REPLACE PB (newf, oldf) Private View VARIANT! --> REPLACE LB (abstr(newf), abstr(oldf)) Public View Receive BA a1 Send C Abstraction Send C A-->B B-->C Receive C AND a3 Receive E C-->B E-->B a2 AND a4

70 Page 69 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern Send E Receive E Send C Mapping E --> B BA--> E B --> C --> REPLACE LB (abstr(newf), abstr(oldf)) Public View Direct partners affected by the change {E, C} A-->B B-->C C-->B E-->B

71 Page 70 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern Send E Receive E Send C Mapping E --> B B--> E B --> C --> REPLACE LB (abstr(newf), abstr(oldf)) Public View Direct partners affected by the change {E, C} A-->B Abstraction + reduction Rules B-->C --> INSERT LE (F1,?,?,? ) --> REPLACE LC (F2,?) C-->B E-->B F1 B--> E F2 B --> C E --> B

72 Page 71 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern Public View of C Public View of Partner B --> REPLACE LC (F2,?) A-->B B --> C F2 B-->C A-->B B-->C F0 B--> E C-->B C-->D C-->D E --> B B --> C C-->B D-->E --> INSERT (F1,?,?,? ) LE Public View of E E-->B F1 B--> E C-->B E-->B E --> B D-->E E-->B Global Choreography Model

73 Page 72 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern Public View of C Public View of Partner B --> REPLACE LC (F2,?) F2 F0 E --> B A-->B B--> E B --> C B --> C F2 C-->B B --> C C-->D C-->B A-->B B-->C C-->D D-->E --> INSERT (F1,?,?,? ) LE Public View of E E-->B F1 B--> E C-->B E-->B E --> B D-->E E-->B Global Choreography Model

74 Page 73 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern Public View of C Public View of Partner B --> REPLACE LC (F2,?) F2 F2 B --> C A-->B A-->B B --> C B-->C F0 B--> E C-->B C-->D C-->D E --> B B --> C --> INSERT (F1,?,?,? ) LE F1 B--> E Public View of E C-->B D-->E E-->B C-->B E-->B E --> B D-->E E-->B Global Choreography Model

75 Page 74 Change Propagation: Replace Pattern Public View of C F2 Public View of Partner B --> REPLACE LC (F2,?) B --> C A-->B B --> C F2 C-->B C-->D A-->B B-->C F0 B--> E Public View of E C-->D E --> B B --> C --> INSERT (F1,?,?,? ) LE F1 B--> E F1 E --> B B--> E C-->B D-->E E-->B C-->B E-->B E --> B D-->E E-->B Global Choreography Model

76 Page 75 Other Issues Which process instances can migrate to the new version? Process-aware Information System 2 Process-aware Information System 1 Process-aware Information System 3 Concurrent Changes?