Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Abductive Reasoning on Compliance Monitoring

Balancing Flexibility and Regulation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Foundations of Intelligent Systems (ISMIS 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10352))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1714 Accesses

Abstract

Many emerging applications in Business Process Management, Clinical Guidelines, Service-Oriented and Multi-Agent Systems, are characterized by distribution, complex interaction and coordination dynamics. Such domains, apparently unrelated, all ask for a suitable tradeoff between flexibility and regulation. In this light, compliance checking emerged as an effective way to understand whether an observed course of interaction agrees with what is expected by a model of the system. In this paper, we single out a non exhaustive list of desiderata and challenges for compliance checking applied at runtime. We then argue that methods, tools and techniques of Computational Logic, and Abductive Reasoning in particular, can be fruitfully exploited to tackle all such challenges in a formally grounded, computationally effective way.

This is an invited paper, related to the keynote presentation given by Prof. Mello.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Distributed process discovery and conformance checking. In: de Lara, J., Zisman, A. (eds.) FASE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7212, pp. 1–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28872-2_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Aalst, W.M.P., et al.: Process mining manifesto. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 169–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28108-2_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: YAWL: yet another workflow language. Inf. Syst. 30(4), 245–275 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distrib. Parallel Databases 14(1), 5–51 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Daolio, D., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Specification and verification of agent interaction protocols in a logic-based system. Scalable Comput.: Pract. Exp. 8(1), 1–13 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Verifiable agent interaction in abductive logic programming: the SCIFF framework. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 9(4), 29:1–29:43 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J.: Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 2(2), 255–287 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Artikis, A., Sergot, M.J., Paliouras, G.: An event calculus for event recognition. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 27(4), 895–908 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bauer, B., Cossentino, M., Cranefield, S., Huget, M.P., Kearney, K., Levy, R., Nodine, M., Odell, J., Cervenka, R., Turci, P., Zhu, H.: The FIPA Agent UML. http://www.auml.org/

  10. Boella, G., Janssen, M., Hulstijn, J., Humphreys, L., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Managing legal interpretation in regulatory compliance. In: ICAIL 2013, pp. 23–32. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bottrighi, A., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Montani, S., Terenziani, P.: Conformance checking of executed clinical guidelines in presence of basic medical knowledge. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 100, pp. 200–211. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28115-0_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Bragaglia, S., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M.: Conformance verification of clinical guidelines in presence of computerized and human-enhanced processes. In: Hommersom, A., Lucas, P.J.F. (eds.) Foundations of Biomedical Knowledge Representation. LNCS, vol. 9521, pp. 81–106. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28007-3_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Briola, D., Mascardi, V., Ancona, D.: Distributed runtime verification of JADE and Jason multiagent systems with prolog. In: CILC 2014, CEUR, vol. 1195, pp. 319–323 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chesani, F., De Masellis, R., Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Mello, P., Montali, M., Tessaris, S.: Abducing compliance of incomplete event logs. In: Adorni, G., Cagnoni, S., Gori, M., Maratea, M. (eds.) AI*IA 2016. LNCS, vol. 10037, pp. 208–222. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-49130-1_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Chesani, F., De Masellis, R., Francescomarino, C.D., Ghidini, C., Mello, P., Montali, M., Tessaris, S.: Abducing workflow traces: a general framework to manage incompleteness in business processes. In: ECAI 2016. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 285, pp. 1734–1735. IOS Press (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chesani, F., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Montali, M., Riguzzi, F., Storari, S.: Exploiting inductive logic programming techniques for declarative process mining. In: Jensen, K., Aalst, W.M.P. (eds.) Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency II. LNCS, vol. 5460, pp. 278–295. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00899-3_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Storari, S.: Testing careflow process execution conformance by translating a graphical language to computational logic. In: Bellazzi, R., Abu-Hanna, A., Hunter, J. (eds.) AIME 2007. LNCS, vol. 4594, pp. 479–488. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-73599-1_64

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: A logic-based, reactive calculus of events. Fundam. Inform. 105(1–2), 135–161 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Representing and monitoring social commitments using the event calculus. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 27(1), 85–130 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chopra, A.K.: Requirements-driven adaptation: compliance, context, uncertainty, and systems. In: RE@RunTime 2011, pp. 32–36. IEEE (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Combi, C., Posenato, R.: Towards temporal controllabilities for workflow schemata. In: TIME 2010, pp. 129–136. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Denecker, M., Kakas, A.: Abduction in logic programming. In: Kakas, A.C., Sadri, F. (eds.) Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond. LNCS, vol. 2407, pp. 402–436. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). doi:10.1007/3-540-45628-7_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L.: Process mining reloaded: event structures as a unified representation of process models and event logs. In: Devillers, R., Valmari, A. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9115, pp. 33–48. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19488-2_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Fahland, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Model repair - aligning process models to reality. Inf. Syst. 47, 220–243 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Tessaris, S., Sandoval, I.V.: Completing workflow traces using action languages. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 314–330. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19069-3_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Fung, T.H., Kowalski, R.A.: The IFF proof procedure for abductive logic programming. J. Log. Program. 33(2), 151–165 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Spiotta, M., Dupré, D.T.: Business process verification with constraint temporal answer set programming. TPLP 13(4–5), 641–655 (2013)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Governatori, G., Hashmi, M., Lam, H.-P., Villata, S., Palmirani, M.: Semantic business process regulatory compliance checking using LegalRuleML. In: Blomqvist, E., Ciancarini, P., Poggi, F., Vitali, F. (eds.) EKAW 2016. LNCS, vol. 10024, pp. 746–761. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-49004-5_48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Norm compliance in business process modeling. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2010. LNCS, vol. 6403, pp. 194–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-16289-3_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Greco, S., Trubitsyna, I., Zumpano, E.: On the semantics of logic programs with preferences. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 30, 501–523 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Initiative, B.P.M.: Business process modeling notation. http://www.bpmn.org

  32. Kakas, A.C., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: Abductive logic programming. J. Log. Comput. 2(6), 719–770 (1992). http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/2.6.719

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Kakas, A.C., Mancarella, P.: Abduction and abductive logic programming. In: Logic Programming, Proceedings of ICPL, pp. 18–19 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kakas, A.C., Michael, A., Mourlas, C.: ACLP: abductive constraint logic programming. J. Log. Program. 44(1–3), 129–177 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Kowalski, R.A.: Algorithm = logic + control. Commun. ACM 22(7), 424–436 (1979)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Kowalski, R.A., Sergot, M.J.: A logic-based calculus of events. New Gener. Comput. 4(1), 67–95 (1986)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. de Leoni, M., Maggi, F.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: An alignment-based framework to check the conformance of declarative process models and to preprocess event-log data. Inf. Syst. 47, 258–277 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (1987)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Loreti, D., Chesani, F., Ciampolini, A., Mello, P.: Distributed compliance monitoring of business processes over mapreduce architectures. In: ICPE 2017, to appear

    Google Scholar 

  40. Luckham, D.C.: The Power of Events: An Introduction to Complex Event Processing in Distributed Enterprise Systems. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ly, L.T., Knuplesch, D., Rinderle-Ma, S., Göser, K., Pfeifer, H., Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: SeaFlows toolset – compliance verification made easy for process-aware information systems. In: Soffer, P., Proper, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2010. LNBIP, vol. 72, pp. 76–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17722-4_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Ly, L.T., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Rinderle-Ma, S., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Compliance monitoring in business processes: functionalities, application, and tool-support. Inf. Syst. 54, 209–234 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Göser, K., Dadam, P.: On enabling integrated process compliance with semantic constraints in process management systems - requirements, challenges, solutions. Inf. Syst. Front. 14(2), 195–219 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Montali, M.: Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models - A Logic-Based Approach. LNBIP, vol. 56. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14538-4

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Montali, M., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Maggi, F.M.: Towards data-aware constraints in declare. In: Proceedings of SAC 2013. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Montali, M., Maggi, F.M., Chesani, F., Mello, P., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Monitoring business constraints with the event calculus. ACM TIST 5(1), 17:1–17:30 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Montali, M., Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Storari, S.: Declarative specification and verification of service choreographies. TWEB 4(1), 3:1–3:62 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Munoz-Gama, J.: Conformance Checking and Diagnosis in Process Mining - Comparing Observed and Modeled Processes. LNBIP, vol. 270. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-49451-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A declarative approach for flexible business processes management. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 169–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11837862_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  50. Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Inf. Syst. 33(1), 64–95 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Singh, M.P.: Agent communication languages: rethinking the principles. In: Huget, M.-P. (ed.) Communication in Multiagent Systems. LNCS, vol. 2650, pp. 37–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-44972-0_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  52. Singh, M.P., Chopra, A.K., Desai, N.: Commitment-based service-oriented architecture. IEEE Comput. 42(11), 72–79 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Smith, F., Proietti, M.: Rule-based behavioral reasoning on semantic business processes. In: ICAART 2013. SciTePress (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Terenziani, P., Raviola, P., Bruschi, O., Torchio, M., Marzuoli, M., Molino, G.: Representing knowledge levels in clinical guidelines. In: Horn, W., Shahar, Y., Lindberg, G., Andreassen, S., Wyatt, J. (eds.) AIMDM 1999. LNCS, vol. 1620, pp. 254–258. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). doi:10.1007/3-540-48720-4_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  55. Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Commitment machines. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) ATAL 2001. LNCS, vol. 2333, pp. 235–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). doi:10.1007/3-540-45448-9_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Federico Chesani & Paola Mello

  2. Free University of Bozen–Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy

    Marco Montali

Authors
  1. Federico Chesani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paola Mello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Montali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Federico Chesani or Paola Mello .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland

    Marzena Kryszkiewicz

  2. University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy

    Annalisa Appice

  3. Institute of Informatics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Dominik Ślęzak

  4. Faculty of Electronics & Information, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland

    Henryk Rybinski

  5. Institute of Mathematics, Warsaw University, Warsaw, Poland

    Andrzej Skowron

  6. Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, North Carolina, USA

    Zbigniew W. Raś

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M. (2017). Abductive Reasoning on Compliance Monitoring. In: Kryszkiewicz, M., Appice, A., Ślęzak, D., Rybinski, H., Skowron, A., Raś, Z. (eds) Foundations of Intelligent Systems. ISMIS 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10352. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60438-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60438-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60437-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60438-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation