Verifying Business Process Compliance by Reasoning about Actions

被引:0
|
作者
D'Aprile, Davide [1 ]
Giordano, Laura [1 ]
Gliozzi, Valentina [2 ]
Martelli, Alberto [2 ]
Pozzato, Gian Luca [2 ]
Dupre, Daniele Theseider [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Piemonte Orientale, Dipartimento Informat, Alessandria, Italy
[2] Univ Toronto, Dipartimento Informat, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
关键词
LOGIC;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
In this paper we address the problem of verifying business process compliance with norms. To this end, we employ reasoning about actions in a temporal action theory. The action theory is defined through a combination of Answer Set Programming and Dynamic Linear Time Temporal Logic (DULL). The temporal action theory allows us to formalize a business process as a temporal domain description, possibly including temporal constraints. Obligations in norms are captured by the notion of commitment, which is borrowed from the social approach to agent communication. Norms are represented using (possibly) non monotonic causal laws which (possibly) enforce new obligations. In this context, verifying compliance amounts to verify that no execution of the business process leaves some commitment unfulfilled. Compliance verification can be performed by Bounded Model Checking.
引用
收藏
页码:99 / +
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Reasoning about actions for spacecraft redundancy management
    Barry, Matthew
    Watson, Richard
    [J]. IEEE Aerospace Applications Conference Proceedings, 1999, 5 : 101 - 112
  • [32] A Logic for Reasoning about Actions and Explicit Observations
    Rens, Gavin
    Varzinczak, Ivan
    Meyer, Thomas
    Ferrein, Alexander
    [J]. AI 2010: ADVANCES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2010, 6464 : 395 - +
  • [33] Reasoning About Intentions: Counterexamples to Reasons for Actions
    Juhos, Csongor
    Quelhas, Ana Cristina
    Byrne, Ruth M. J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2015, 41 (01) : 55 - 76
  • [34] Logic for Reasoning about Components of Persuasive Actions
    Budzynska, Katarzyna
    Kacprzak, Magdalena
    Rembelski, Pawel
    [J]. FOUNDATIONS OF INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, PROCEEDINGS, 2009, 5722 : 201 - +
  • [35] INTEGRATING REASONING ABOUT ACTIONS AND BAYESIAN NETWORKS
    Martini, Yves
    Thielscher, Michael
    [J]. ICAART 2010: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AGENTS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, VOL 1: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2010, : 298 - 304
  • [36] An argumentation framework for reasoning about actions and change
    Kakas, A
    Miller, R
    Toni, F
    [J]. LOGIC PROGRAMMING AND NONMONOTONIC REASONING, 1999, 1730 : 78 - 91
  • [37] Possibilistic Reasoning about Actions in Agent Systems
    Fan, Tuan-Fang
    Liau, Churn-Jung
    [J]. 2018 IEEE 42ND ANNUAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND APPLICATIONS CONFERENCE (COMPSAC), VOL 1, 2018, : 787 - 788
  • [38] Dynamic logic for reasoning about actions and agents
    Meyer, JJC
    [J]. LOGIC-BASED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2000, 597 : 281 - 311
  • [39] Reasoning about actions, knowledge and normative ability
    Lai, Xianwei
    Hu, Shanli
    Ning, Zhengyuan
    [J]. INTELLIGENT INFORMATION PROCESSING III, 2006, 228 : 43 - +
  • [40] Argument Schemes for Reasoning About the Actions of Others
    Atkinson, Katie
    Bench-Capon, Trevor
    [J]. COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT, 2016, 287 : 71 - 82