In: Paolo Ciancarini, Chris Hankin (Eds.): Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1061: Coordination Languages and Models: First International Conference, COORDINATION '96 Cesena, Italy, April 15?17, 1996, pages 440-443. January 2006. URL: http://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.1007/3-540-61052-968,.
Abstract: There are two reasons to use simple control as a notion of behavioral correctness. First, it implies there are no control anomalies, like deadlock, useless activities, and multiple response [6]. Second, a simple control model behaves like an activity; this allows consistent or-abstraction in which a process model can be used safely within a larger model. Or-behavior is the most commonly accepted from of model abstraction (as in, e.g., ICN, VPL/Rasp, Action Workflow). Simple control is related to other behavioral properties of free-choice Petri nets. In fact we prove in [6] that a model has simple control if and only if a connected free choice net derived from the model is live and safe in the sense of Our framework formalizes threads of control in business process models and relates them to behavioral correctness, by demanding that threads of control be adequately combined. We have recognized several applications of thread theory within workflow models: diagnostic of why a model might fail, model building, advanced exception handling, unanticipated exceptions.