Organisations have to cope with large numbers of business rules and existing regulations governing the business in which they operate. Such rules are difficult to maintain due to their size and complexity, and it is increasingly challenging to ensure that each business process adheres to those rules. As such, automated extraction of business processes from rules has three clear advantages: (1) visualisation of all possible executions allowed by the rules, (2) automated execution and compliance by design, (3) identification of “inefficiencies” in the business rules. Existing approaches, however, only allow for the generation of partial traces based on input specifications and cannot handle many different input cases resulting in a full process. This paper presents a formal method to visualise and operationalise such sets of rules as a verifiable business process that is compliant by design, which allows us to analyse all possible execution paths. Additionally, we formally prove correctness of the business processes generated by our method. The approach is implemented in a tool and evaluated on both performance and correctness, showing that even for highly complex sets of rules the approach performs well and outperforms a well-known state-of-the-art approach. Evaluation on a real-life process shows the feasibility of the presented approach.

Organisations typically have to cope with large numbers of business rules and existing regulations governing the business in which they operate. Due to the size and complexity of those rules, maintenance is difficult and it is increasingly complicated to ensure that each business process adheres to those rules. As such, automated extraction of business processes from rules has a number of clear advantages: (1) visualisation of all possible executions allowed by the rules, (2) automated execution and compliance by design, (3) identification of "inefficiencies" in the business rules. Existing approaches, however, only allow to generate partial traces based on input specifications and cannot handle many different input cases resulting in a full process. This paper presents a formal method to visualise and operationalise such sets of rules as a verifiable business process that is compliant by design and allows us to analyse all possible execution paths. In addition, it maintains information of all distinct input cases, to preserve dependencies between consecutive exclusive paths.

We describe a constraint-based automated planner named Transition Constraints for Parallel Planning (TCPP). TCPP constructs its constraint model from a redefined version of the domain transition graphs (DTG) of a given planning problem. TCPP encodes state transitions in the redefined DTGs by using table constraints with cells containing don't cares or wild cards. TCPP uses Minion the constraint solver to solve the constraint model and returns a parallel plan. We empirically compare TCPP with the other state-of-the-art constraint-based parallel planner PaP2. PaP2 encodes action successions in the finite state automata (FSA) as table constraints with cells containing sets of values. PaP2 uses SICStus Prolog as its constraint solver. We also improve PaP2 by using don’t cares and mutex constraints. Our experiments on a number of standard classical planning benchmark domains demonstrate TCPP's efficiency over the original PaP2 running on SICStus Prolog and our reconstructed and enhanced versions of PaP2 running on Minion.

We present a planner named Transition Constraints for Parallel Planning (TCPP). TCPP constructs a new constraint model from domain transition graphs (DTG) of a given planning problem. TCPP encodes the constraint model by using table constraints that allow don't cares or wild cards as cell values. TCPP uses Minion the constraint solver to solve the constraint model and returns the parallel plan. Empirical results exhibit the efficiency of our planning system over state-of-the-art constraint-based planners.