Super ontology stack_review_m36_051
-
Upload
john-domingue -
Category
Education
-
view
375 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Super ontology stack_review_m36_051
SUPER
Ontology Stack
Pierre Grenon, OU
Berlin, 7 May 2009
© SUPER 12.04.23 John Kayser (PC/SAP) 2
Review Agenda, Day I
09.00 Briefing meeting
09.30 Welcome
09.40 SUPER Today, SUPER Successes and a SUPER Future
10.45 Technical Deep Dives
- Part I: Ontology Stack and COBRA
- Part II: Reasoner and WSMO Integration
- Part III: SBP Execution & Analysis
12.30 Lunch
Why Semantics?
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 3
Business ActivityModelAgent
Resources
Data
Time
Analyst
IT specialist
Reusable and sharable resource
SUPER Business Process Management
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 4
Business Process
sBPMN
sEPC
Behavioural Reasoning
Semantic Web Services(WSMO)
analyse
BPMN
EPC
model
BPMO
transform
transformsupport
execute
BPEL
sBPEL
BPEL4SWS
Reverse BusinessEngineering
MonitoringAnalysis
Organisational Context Applications
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 5
SUPER Ontology StackMonth 12
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 6
SUPER Ontology StackMonth 24
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 7
SUPER Ontology Stack Month 36
Why sBPMN?
■ BPMN is a widely used notation for BPM. ■ SUPER needs an entry point for BPMN
users.■ BPMN is a graphical notation that needs
explicit semantics (provided by sBPMN).
Lessons learnt:■ SUPER needs to create entry points. ■ SUPER needs to be independent of
specific notations.■ SUPER needs to remain up-to-date as
standards change.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 8
sBPMN excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 9
ca. 100 concepts50+ axioms
Why sEPC?
■ SUPER’s proof of capability to handle multiple entry points corresponding to distinct perspectives.
■ EPC is different from BPMN.
■ The sematics for EPC is distinct from that for BPMN.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 10
sEPC excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 11
40+ concepts
Why BPMO?
Intermediate representation for:■ Abstracting over different notations,
perspectives, levels of understanding■ Bridging different notations■ Bridging the world of modelling,
execution and analysis■ Providing a central platform for
connecting additional knowledge sources
The above facilitates inter-representational reasoning and querying.
► Eg, one can pose a query on a BPEL execution trace and the answer uses knowledge from the original BPMN diagram and the organisational context.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 12
BPMO excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 13
ca. 70 concepts
Why sBPEL?
■ sBPEL is SUPER’s ontology at the receiving end of ontology-based model transformation (mediated by BPMO) hooking into execution (BPEL through its BPEL4SWS extension).
■ sBPEL and BPEL4SWS have hooks allowing for the execution of SWS and of their compositions.
■ We can reason about sBPEL, that which
is about to be executed and that which comes after execution (thus supporting analysis).
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 14
sBPEL excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 15
2 concepts
80 concepts8 instances7 axioms
15 concepts
Why BRO?
■ Support high level reasoning about behaviour
► E.g. compliance checking, composition validation
■ This reasoning can include any knowledge carried within the ontology stack.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 16
BRO
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 17
(BPMO process)
20+ concepts3 instancesca. 20 axioms
Why UPO?
■ Umbrella ontology for the stack ■ Gathers common concepts and
relations■ Facilitates inter-ontology reasoning
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 18
50+ concepts20+ instancesca. 20 relations3 relation instances20+ axioms
UPO’s usage is embedded in that of BPMO
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 19
BPMO UPOBPMO
Why a domain ontology stack?
■ Resources for enriching the representation of BP models based on BPMO.
■ Domain ontologies provide values for attributes of BPMO process instances.
■ Vertical domain with three levels of generality:
► Generic business domain (organisation) ontologies ► Extended by telecommunication ontologies► Extended by use case specific ontologies.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 20
UPO is extended by Organisation Ontologies
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 21
OSOOUO
BPRO
ResOnt
BFO
BRONTO
BMO
BFO OSO & OUO
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 22
ca. 1K concepts8 axioms
Organisation Ontologies excerpt
9 concepts11 relations
& 19 concepts
Organisation Ontologies excerpt (2)
BRONTO ResOnt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 23
50+ concepts 30+ instances10+ relations 3 relation instances30+ axioms
20+ concepts 3 instances4 relations ca. 20 axioms
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 24
40+ conceptsca. 900 instances10+ relations20 axioms
Organisation Ontologies excerpt (3)
BMO
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 25
deo
dro
dpo
ecao
16 concepts 36 concepts
10 concepts25 concepts9 instances
BPRO
Organisation Ontologies excerpt (4)
SUPER Domain Ontology StackOrganisation Ontologies
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 26
Why NGOSS Ontologies (YATOSP)?
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 27
■ Support communication and inter-operability in the telecommunication domain
■ Provide an easy entry point for using SUPER in the telecommunication domain
■ NGOSS ontologies correspond to a set of industry standards
NGOSS excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 28
ca. 370 concepts 360 instances4 axioms
Telco business process functionseTOM TAM
IT systems for process execution
200+ concepts 1K+ instances5 axioms
NGOSS excerpt (2)
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 29
ca. 1.3K concepts ca. 1.2K instances4 relation instances8 axioms
Common domain vocabulary
SID
Telco business process contract
14 concepts ca. 220 instances3 relations
NBC
Domain Ontology Stack YATOSP (NGOSS Ontologies)
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 30
Why use case ontologies and knowledge bases?
■ Each enterprise has its specifics:► Organisational structure► Variants and additions to BP models► Data structure.
■ Each enterprise has its own data.
■ Common umbrella framework and common representation formalism.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 31
Use Case Ontologies
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 32
Example of Application (from TID Use Case)
Ontology Extension Process Instance
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 33
To be continued
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 34
Appendix
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 35
SUPER Process
Ontology Stack
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 36
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 37
SUPER Ontology StackMonth 36
UPO excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 38
50+ concepts20+ instancesca. 20 relations3 relation instances20+ axioms
BRONTO excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 39
20+ concepts3 instances4 relationsca. 20 axioms
OSO & OUO excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 40
9 concepts11 relations
19 concepts
ResO excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 41
50+ concepts 30+ instances10+ relations 3 relation instances30+ axioms
ResO excerpt
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 42
50+ concepts 30+ instances10+ relations 3 relation instances30+ axioms
NGOSS Ontologies
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 43
eTOM
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 44
ca. 370 concepts 360 instances4 axioms
Telco business process functions
SID
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 45
ca. 1.3K concepts ca. 1.2K instances4 relation instances8 axioms
Common domain vocabulary
NBC
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 46
14 concepts ca. 220 instances3 relations
Telco business process contract
TAM
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 47
200+ concepts 1K+ instances5 axioms
IT systems for process execution
Process ontologies
in relation to
architecture
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 48
sBPMN usage in SUPER tools and components
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 49
ModellingTool
Monitoring & Management
Tool
Semantic BPEL
Execution Engine
Semantic Execution
EnvironmentAnalysis Tool
Transformation
SBP Discovery
SBP Process Mediation
SBP Composition
Data Mediation
Semantic Web Services
Repository
ExecutionHistory
Business Process Library
SUPER Repositories
SUPER Plafform Services
SUPER ToolingSUPER Execution
Semantic Service Bus
Event Sink
Deployment
SBP Reasoner
Protocol BinderXPDL2sBPMN
and
sBPMN2BPMO
translators
sEPC usage in SUPER tools and components
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 50
ModellingTool
Monitoring & Management
Tool
Semantic BPEL
Execution Engine
Semantic Execution
EnvironmentAnalysis Tool
Transformation
SBP Discovery
SBP Process Mediation
SBP Composition
Data Mediation
Semantic Web Services
Repository
ExecutionHistory
Business Process Library
SUPER Repositories
SUPER Plafform Services
SUPER ToolingSUPER Execution
Semantic Service Bus
Event Sink
Deployment
SBP Reasoner
Protocol Binder
sEPC2BPMO
translator
BPMO usage in SUPER tools and components
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 51
ModellingTool
Monitoring & Management
Tool
Semantic BPEL
Execution Engine
Semantic Execution
EnvironmentAnalysis Tool
Transformation
SBP Discovery
SBP Process Mediation
SBP Composition
Data Mediation
Semantic Web Services
Repository
ExecutionHistory
Business Process Library
SUPER Repositories
SUPER Plafform Services
SUPER ToolingSUPER Execution
Semantic Service Bus
Event Sink
Deployment
SBP Reasoner
Protocol Binder
BPMO Modeller
BP Mediator design-time
Translators: BPMO2SBPEL sEPC2BPMO sBPMN2BPMO
BPMO API
sBPEL usage in SUPER tools and components
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 52
ModellingTool
Monitoring & Management
Tool
Semantic BPEL
Execution Engine
Semantic Execution
EnvironmentAnalysis Tool
Transformation
SBP Discovery
SBP Process Mediation
SBP Composition
Data Mediation
Semantic Web Services
Repository
ExecutionHistory
Business Process Library
SUPER Repositories
SUPER Plafform Services
SUPER ToolingSUPER Execution
Semantic Service Bus
Event Sink
Deployment
SBP Reasoner
Protocol Binder
BPMO2sBPEL
and
sBPEL2BPEL4SWS
translators
BRO usage in SUPER tools and components
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 53
ModellingTool
Monitoring & Management
Tool
Semantic BPEL
Execution Engine
Semantic Execution
EnvironmentAnalysis Tool
Transformation
SBP Discovery
SBP Process Mediation
SBP Composition
Data Mediation
Semantic Web Services
Repository
ExecutionHistory
Business Process Library
SUPER Repositories
SUPER Plafform Services
SUPER ToolingSUPER Execution
Semantic Service Bus
Event Sink
Deployment
SBP Reasoner
Protocol Binder
BP Mediator Reasoning
Support validation of composition
BPMO2BRO translator
RBEO usage in SUPER tools and components
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 54
ModellingTool
Monitoring & Management
Tool
Semantic BPEL
Execution Engine
Semantic Execution
EnvironmentAnalysis Tool
Transformation
SBP Discovery
SBP Process Mediation
SBP Composition
Data Mediation
Semantic Web Services
Repository
ExecutionHistory
Business Process Library
SUPER Repositories
SUPER Plafform Services
SUPER ToolingSUPER Execution
Semantic Service Bus
Event Sink
Deployment
SBP Reasoner
Protocol Binder
Semantic Business Process Discovery Engine (sRBE tool)
Detailed whys
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 55
Why NGOSS Ontologies (YATOSP)?
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 56
■ The Telemanagement Forum (TMF) is an association of telecommunication enterprises and IT providers.
■ The TMF’s development of the New Generation Operation Support Systems (NGOSS) results, among other things, in a set of standards.
■ These were ontologised in SUPER.
SID Shared Information Domain Common domain vocabulary
NBC NGOSS Business Contract Telco business process contract
eTOM Enhanced Telco Operation Map Telco business process functions
TAM Telco Applications Map IT systems for process execution
Why an ontology stack?
■ A stack is formed of elements which are putatively independent to some degree.
■ The degree of independence depends on application context sampling the stack (facilitating partial reuse).
■ Also in some cases, size matters and the break down of ontological resources can be motivated by efficiency and technical parameters.
■ Finally, SUPER is a collaborative project with distributed competences and responsibilities.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 57
Why ontologies?
■ Representing reality■ Bridging between different representations, possibly
of the same things using different representation formalisms
■ Providing explicit semantics to existing representation formalisms
■ Abstracting from existing representations■ Supporting updatable and potentially growing
interoperability with centralised mapping■ Supporting scalability through mechanisation and
automatised translation ■ Supporting sharing and reuse over the Semantic Web
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 58
Why Ontology-based Representation for BPM?
■ Heterogeneous sources and viewpoints abstracted into a single ontology-based representation of processes, their structures, relations, and properties for which BPMO provides the backbone.► Translation from and/or to BPMN, sEPC, BPEL
■ Heterogeneous formalisms streamlined into a single knowledge representation formalism (WSML):► bringing BP Models to machines► facilitating integration and interoperability► allowing automatisation, execution, reuse► in an accessible and scalable manner.
© SUPER 12.04.23 Pierre Grenon, OU 59