Implementation of Workflow Intuitive Formal Approach ...

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

Implementation of Workflow Intuitive Formal Approach in Multiplexing of Business Process Offices A.Q. Ansari EED, JMI, New Delhi [email protected]

V. K. Nangia, Department of CSE, MSIT, New Delhi [email protected]

Akshay Anand, Department of CSE, MSIT, New Delhi [email protected]

Mayank Kumar, Department of CSE, MSIT, New Delhi [email protected]

ABSTRACT: I. The expanding Business Processing Offices (BPOs) multiplexing infrastructure can be viewed from the parallel and distributed processing perspective. There is an emergent need for addressing issues like uninterrupted service availability, quality of service, technological support with the existing legislative procedures to enhance performance of professional outsourcing etc. In the past, BPO infrastructures were seen as stand-alone local units for their functioning. However, the new generation BPOs need not be restricted to a single country but are spread over multiple countries and far flung geographical locations. There may occur unforeseen interruptions in service due to communications breakdown between stations or degradation of technical quality of service provided. To detect such a problem and its location, and to provide prompt rerouting of the communication through alternative BPOs for seamlessly transferring of responding BPO functionality, we propose an application and a method of implementation of the Workflow Intuitive Formal Approach (WIFA), an automatic decision making technique developed only recently. Along with the intuitiveness of the decision making and the abilities of supporting automatic workflow validation and enactment, WIFA possesses the distinguishing feature of allowing users who are not proficient in formal methods to construct and dynamically modify the workflows that address their needs. We can further extend WIFA to take resources into account when modeling and enacting workflows. Keywords: WIFA model; Intuitive; Multicasting; BPO multiplexing; Parallel and Distributed processing.

INTRODUCTION

The emergency managers in any situation and organization need to have tools to assist in promptly responding by taking effective appropriate actions in accordance with the departmental contingencies plans. In a situation of natural or man-made disasters the emergency management is a process by which all individuals, groups, and communities manage hazards in an effort to avoid or ameliorate the impact of disasters resulting from the hazards. It involves four phases: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Mitigation efforts attempt to prevent hazards from developing into disasters altogether or to reduce the effects of disasters when they occur. In the preparedness phase, emergency managers develop plans of action when the disaster strikes and analyze and manage required resources. The aim of the recovery is to restore the affected area to its previous state. Effective emergency management relies on thorough integration of emergency plans at all levels of government and nongovernment involvement. It is highly desirable to have tools to assist emergency managers in taking appropriate actions effectively. A well-designed and developed workflow tool could provide process control of the emergency procedures to ensure that they are completed in the correct order and on time. Among the several distinguishing requirements for an emergency response workflow tool the most important is that the tool must provide users with considerable flexibility in workflow modeling and modification. This is because an emergency work-flow can grow or shrink to cope 307

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

with frequent changes of the course of actions dictated by incoming events, which is totally different from normal manufacturing system workflows where, once the workflow is established, the users just execute it repeatedly without the necessity of frequent modification. The need of making many ad hoc changes to emergency workflows calls for an on-the-spot verification of the correctness of the modified workflows. The tool must also be relatively simple and intuitive to use. Many informal tools have been developed in this regard over past decades. Among them, Unified Modeling Language (UML) Activity Diagram [1] represents the business and operational step by step workflows of components in a system. An activity diagram shows the overall flow of control. An Event-driven Process Chain (EPC) [2] diagram uses symbols of several kinds to show the control flow structure (sequence of functions, decisions, events and other elements) of a business process. Unfortunately, neither the syntax nor the semantics of EPC are well-defined. Business Process Execution Language (BPEL) is used for definition and execution for business process using web services [3]. Flowchart is often used for the schematic representation of an algorithm or a process. These tools along with workflow tools are not suitable for the Incident Command System (ICS) workflow management because it does not allow the verification of the workflow correctness. A number of formal techniques were also developed for workflow modeling and analysis, such as Petri nets [4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9] Event Algebra [10] and application development based on the encapsulated pre-modeled process templates [11]. Unfortunately, they were not intuitive as well as less flexible. To address the workflow management requirements raised by emergency planning and response systems, a new technique was developed over the last few years, called the Workflow Intuitive Formal Approach (WIFA) for the modeling and analysis of workflows [12], [13], [14]. In addition to the abilities of supporting automatic workflow validation and enactment, WIFA possesses the distinguishing feature of allowing users who are not proficient in formal

methods to construct and dynamically modify the workflows that address their needs. WIFA was further extended to take resources into account when modeling and enacting workflows [15]. Resources can become important decision factors when combined with control flow information. In many situations, business processes are constrained by scarce resources. The lack of resources can cause contention, the need for some tasks to wait for others to complete, and the slowing down of the accomplishment of larger goals [16]. Currently, during a time of crisis, a decision maker often concentrates on a single criterion in order to simplify, speed up, or control the decision process itself, unable to identify ways in which tasks can be executed in parallel in the most efficient way. A resource-constrained workflow model can support the decision process by analyzing multiple criteria on behalf of the decision maker. It can keep track of resource availability, disable the paths that are not executable, and present all executable paths, thus allowing the emergency responders to make decisions and implement them more confidently. We need to study the BPO multiplexing infrastructure from the parallel and distributed processing perspective for addressing issues like the uninterrupted service availability and Quality of Service (QoS). We examine with a broader outlook, the scope of WIFA work flow model in Section II. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section III introduces the Implementation of WIFA in BPO multiplexing; Section IV describes the framework for configuration of WIFA for a nine stations BPO network; Section V includes conclusions and suggestions for future work. II.

THE WIFA MODEL

WIFA possesses the distinguishing feature of allowing users who are not proficient in formal methods to construct and dynamically modify the workflows that address their needs. The tool is also relatively simple and intuitive to use. In addition it has the abilities of supporting automatic workflow validation and enactment. For the accuracy purpose

308

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

WIFA tool is able to formally verify the workflow correctness [17],[18]. A workflow is composed of tasks that are executed according to some order specified by some precedence constraints. The preset of tasks is the set of all tasks that are immediate predecessors of the task, denoted by * . The postset of is the set of all tasks that are immediate successors of the tasks, denoted by . If ≥ 1, then the execution of may trigger multiple tasks. Suppose { , } is a subset of * then there are two possibilities: 1) and can be executed simultaneously, or 2) Only one of them can be executed, and the execution of one will disable the other due to conflict between them. We denote former case by = =0 and latter by = =1. In WIFA, a workflow is defined as a fivetuple; WF = , where 1) T={T1 , T2,…..,Tm} is a set of tasks, m ≥ 1; 2) P = m x m is the precedence matrix of the task set. If is the direct predecessor of , then =1 else =0. 3) C = m x m is the conflict matrix of the task set. for i = 1, 2, …m and j = 1, 2, …m. 4) A = (A(T1), A(T2)…….. A(Tm)) defines precondition for each task. 5) S0 0,1,2,3}minitial state of the workflow. A state of the WF is denoted by S = (S( ),S( ),...,S( )), where S( ) {0,1,2,3}. S( )=0 means is not executable at state S and not executed previously S( )=1 means is executable at state S and not executed previously S( )=2 means is not executable at state S and executed previously S( )=3 means is executable at state S and executed previously. Thus only those tasks whose values are either 1 or 3 can be selected for execution. Suppose task at state S ais selected for execution, and the new state resulted from the execution of is S b,

then the execution of is denoted by Sa( )Sb.At the initial state S0, for any task T, if there is no such that =1 then S0( )=1, else 0. We see here that a task that has no predecessor does not need to wait for any other task to execute first. In other words, the task is executable immediately. We assume that there is one and only one such task in a workflow called start task. It constitutes the initial trigger of a workflow. We also assume there is one and only task that has no successors, which is the end task. The execution of an end task marks the completion of a workflow. There are several more transition rules to find S 1, S2 and S3 for every task. Fig. 1 shows a workflow model with seven tasks, T= {T1, T2, …T7}, in which T1is the starting task of the workflow. The execution of T1triggers both T2and T3, which do not conflict with each other, i.e., c23= c32= 0. T2can be triggered by either T1or T6, i.e., A(T2) = {{T1}, {T6}. The execution of T5triggers both T6and T7, which conflict with each other, i.e., c67= c76= 1. T7is executable only if both T3or T5are executed, i.e., A(T7) = {{T3}, {T5}. The initial state is S0= (1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0). After the execution of T1, the new state will be S1= (2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0). If in the next step we select T2for execution, the new state will be S2= (2, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0). T6 T2

T4

T5 T7

T1 T3 Fig. 1 A seven-task workflow

State Transition Rules The dynamics of a WIFA workflow can be captured by state transitions. The state transitions are guided by the following rules: If Sa( )Sb, then ∀ ∈ ,

309

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

1) If

=

then Sb( ) = 2;

2) If ≠ then the state value of at new state Sbdepends on its state value at state S a. We consider four cases: Case A – Sa( ) = 0: If = 1 and ∃A ∈A(Tj) such that Sb(Tk) = 2 for any Tk∈A, then Sb(Tj) = 1; otherwise S b(Tj) = 0. Case B – Sa(Tj) = 1 If = 0 then S b(Tj) = 1; otherwise S b(Tj) = 0. Case C – Sa(Tj) = 2 If = 1 and ∃A ∈A(Tj) such that Sb(Tk) = 2 for any Tk∈A, then Sb(Tj) = 3; otherwise S b(Tj) = 2. Case D –S a(Tj) = 3 If = 0 then S b(Tj) = 3; otherwise S b(Tj) = 2. Note that a state value can increment from 0 to 1, from 1 to 2 or from 2 to 3; it can also decrement from 1 to 0 or from 3 to 2. But it cannot decrement from 2 to 1. Although WIFA was designed with a high degree of usability in mind, it has not sacrificed expressive power. As such, WIFA is able to model sequential and concurrent execution of tasks, conflict resolution, synchronization, mutual exclusion and loops [19],[20].

III IMPLEMENTATION OF WIFA IN BPO MULTIPLEXING Business Process Office (BPO) Business process Offices handle functions which are a form of outsourcing of work by large business organizations and involves the contracting of the operations and responsibilities of a specific business functions (or processes) to a third-party service provider. Originally, this was associated with manufacturing firms, such as Coca-Cola that outsourced large segments of its supply chain. In the contemporary context, it is primarily used to refer to the outsourcing of services.BPO is typically

categorized into back office outsourcing - which includes internal business functions such a human resources or finance and accounting and front office outsourcing - which includes customer-related services such as contact center services.BPO that is contracted outside a company's country is called offshore outsourcing. BPO that is contracted to a company's neighboring (or nearby) country is called near shore outsourcing.Given the proximity of BPO industry to the information-technology industry,sometimes it is also categorized as an information technology-enabled service or ITES, Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) and Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) being some of the subsegments of business process outsourcing industry [21],[22]. Multiplexing of BPOs communications Multiplexing of BPO infrastructure using Customer Interface Array (CIA), is a distributed environment across various service centers. We need to study the BPO multiplexing infrastructure from the parallel and distributed processing perspective for addressing issues like QoS technological support to the existing legislative procedures to enhance performance of professional outsourcing. In the past, BPO infrastructures were examined more as stand-alone infrastructural local units for their performance. However, with their new generation, BPO need not to be restricted to a single country but spread over multiple countries also. Multicasting plays a very important and critical role for collective communication operations in BPO multiplexing for interorganizational briefings on the start of a new shift, code file distribution. This communication is based on deploying a routing scheme using multiple unicast communication[23],[24]. Application of WIFA for BPO Multiplexing These days, the BPO locations of services are widely spread geographically and could be seamlessly accessed through multicasting communication even though located for example, as far away as in China, India, United States, United Kingdom or Australia. If there occurs any problem

310

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

at a particular station due to any disruption of communication, this may lead to loss of data and loss of time as well. To find and rectify such a problem that is at a particular station, we have to look at the whole system to reconfigure and to restore the operations of affected BPOs. But if we use the emergency response workflow mechanism and particularly in that the WIFA model, then we could easily fast recover from such a time consuming problem. We can actually implement WIFA as the tasks can here be considered as the different services providers at different centers. To Configure the BPO Network To implement WIFA model, we assume and consider nine BPOs akin to the tasks of earlier example. This network can be depicted as a graph in Fig.2.

Figure 2. A nine BPOs interconnection network Here the set T of tasks comprises as T= {T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8, T9} where T1 is BPO Unit 1, T2 is BPO Unit 2 and so on. The corresponding Precedence Matrix and Conflict Matrix are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 1 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 1 0

Table 2: For the same graph of fig. 2, we have Conflict matrix(C)as below; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

For the given graph the corresponding Precondition set is: A(BPO UNIT 1)=none A(BPO UNIT 2)={ BPO UNIT 1} A(BPO UNIT 3)={{ BPO UNIT 2,{BPO UNIT 3}} A(BPO UNIT 4)={BPO UNIT 2} A(BPO UNIT 5)={ BPO UNIT 7} A(BPO UNIT 6)={ BPO UNIT 3} A(BPO UNIT 7)={ BPO UNIT 6} A(BPO UNIT 8)={ BPO UNIT 4, BPO UNIT 7} A(BPO UNIT 9)={ BPO UNIT 8} The Initial state is S0=(1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) For certain transition rules, we find the state condition change to 1, 2 or 3. State Transition Rules

Table 1: Precedece matrix (P) for the graph shown in fig 2. 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

The dynamics of a WIFA workflow model are captured by state transitions. State transitions are guided by the following two rulesIf S a(BPOi)S b then:

311

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

1) if BPOj = BPOi, then S b (BPOj)=2; 2) if BPOj≠BPOithen the state value of BPOj at new state Sb depends on its state value at state S a. Consider the following cases: CASE A: S a(BPOj)=0, If pij=1 and such that S a(BPOk)=2 for any BPOk belongs to A then Sa(BPOj)=1 , otherwise 0. CASE B: S a(BPOj) =1, otherwise =0.

If cij =0 then Sa(BPOj)=1,

CASE C: S a(BPOj)=2, If pij=1 and such that S a(BPOk)=2 for any BPOk belongs to A then Sa(BPOj)=3, otherwise 2 CASE D: S a(BPOj) =3, otherwise =2.

Ifcij =0 then Sa(BPOj)=3,

By above, rules we have S1,S2 and S3 as follows: S 1= (2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) S 2 = (2, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) S 3 = (2, 2, 2, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0) Where S 3(BPO4) = 1 means BPO4 is still executable. According to the previous state transition rules, for example, a task’s state value at a given state other than the initial state is 0 if one of the following holds.

Note that a state value can increment from 0 to 1, from 1 to 2, or from 2 to 3; it can also decrement from 1 to 0 or from 3 to 2. But it cannot decrement from 2 to 1. For example, in the workflow of Fig. 2, BPO1 is the only task executable at the initial state S 0. When BPO1is executed, BPO2is triggered, and the new state is S1 = (2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0). The execution of BPO2will trigger both BPO3and BPO4, and the new state after the execution is S2 = (2, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0). Now we can select either BPO3 or BPO4 for execution, and because they do not conflict with each other, when one is executed, another one is still available for execution. Suppose we executeBPO3at S2, then it follows from the state transition rules that the resultant state is S 3 = (2, 2, 2, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0),where S3 (BPO4) = 1, meaning BPO4is still executable. Applying these rules we can very well locate where the conflict arises and find the solution to rectify it. As we can clearly see after finding these states that the conflict comes in BPO5and BPO8. And if BPO5 is given the preference then the BPO8 suffers and vice versa. IV.

FRAMEWORK FOR CONFIGURATION

The framework which was used by us to implement the BPO multiplexing problem is in C#.It was chosen keeping in mind that for any kind of problem, the programming code should run effectively. Why .NET Framework

1) Its state value is 0 in the previous state, and it is not the successor of the task that is just executed. 2) Its state value is 0 in the previous state, and it is the successor of the task that is just executed, but for each of its precondition sets, there is at least one task that is not executed. 3) Its state value is 1 in the previous state but it conflicts with the task that is just executed.

The .NET Framework is a new computing platform that simplifies application development in the highly distributed environment of the Internet[25]. .NET Remoting .NET remoting enables the programmer to build widely distributed applications easily, whether application components are all on one computer or spread out across the entire world. One can build client applications that use objects in other

312

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

processes on the same computer or on any other computer that is reachable over its network. One can also use .NET remoting to communicate with other application domains in the same process. As a result, it is flexible and easily customizable. One can replace one communication protocol with another, or one serialization format with another without recompiling the client or the server. In addition, the remoting system assumes no particular application model. One can communicate from a Web application, a console application, a Windows Service from almost anything one wants to use. Remoting servers can also be of any type of application domain. Any application can host remoting objects and provide its services to any client on its computer or network[26].

Architecture Namespace Namespace is used to contain all the classes of the program. It is like the parent which is containing all the classes used in the program. The class containing the main class is ‘BPO_MULTICAST_APPLICATION’ which contains an object of class ‘FORM’. ‘FORM’ is the class which has its objects in all the respective classes (event listener, threading classes, etc…). This way all the classes have been defined compactly in a single file, thus the handling becomes easier.

Application.Run(new BPO_MULTICAST_APPLICATION()); } } It enables the visualstyles which are implemented in GUI, text rendering to show textbox in the given format and then runs the BPO_MULTICAST_APPLICATION class. BPO_MULTICAST_APPLICATION All the functions are specified in this class and are defined in the methods section. HEADERS USED using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.ComponentModel; using System.Data; using System.Drawing; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using System.Windows.Forms; using System.Drawing.Drawing2D;

Classes Used PROGRAM.CS This class contains the main entry point for the application. static class Program { static void Main() { Application.EnableVisualStyles();

Fig 3. Class diagram of WIFA implemenation for BPO multiplexing example

Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(f alse);

313

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

Fig5.This is the first screenshot where the user enters the precedence matrix and number of BPO units.

Flow chart for the workflow model START THE APPLICA MAIN WINDOW FORM APPLICATION ENTER NO. OF TASKS

ENTER THE PRECEDENCE MATRIX CALCULATE THE PRECONDITION SET INITIALIZE THE GRAPHICS AND DRAW THE TASK

CHEC K THE CONF

Ye

SHOW THE ERROR IN

Fig6. This is the second screenshot where the user enters the number of BPOs and then those BPOs are displayed graphically at different coordinates.

N PRINT THE PRECONDI TION SET

Fig 4. Flow chart of WIFA implemenation for BPO multiplexing example Screen Shots

Fig 7. This is the third screenshot where the user enters the precedence matrix values.

314

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010

Fig8. This is the fourth screenshot where the WIFA calculated precondition set is displayed at the right corner of the screen and a graph is generated accordingly.

REFERENCES

V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

[2] M. B. Juric. (2005), “A hands-on introductionto BPEL”[Online] available:http://www.oracle.com/

The fast automatic recovery from response loss is of paramount importance in the BPO industry. The proposed application of the WIFA model supports this feature of lossless communications in BPO environment very well. For future direction of work the potential mechanisms for exploration are as follows: a) Redundant Response Delivery (RRD) b) Adaptive Response Delivery (ARD) c) extended Adaptive Response Delivery (eARD) In the multicasting communication we choose the optimum path for the network to provide graphical form solution for ease of cognizance. Once the network is established the response loss phase gets activated. As WIFA itself is a dynamic model and can judge the network transitions, so the issues of application of response loss system need to be examined continuously. The overlay network, which deals at the application layer above the underlying network (e.g. a dial-up connection is based on telephone line) using virtual server is one such approach. Mutual Anonymity Multicast (MAM) uses proxy servers to hide the underlying node from the other nodes of the network providing a security to the different nodes from a direct access. Authors are currently examining these issues. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The encouragement and guidance received from Dr. Arun B. Patki, Senior Director & Scientist ‘G’ of DIT, Min of Comm. & IT, GOI in pursuing specialization in multicasting is highly valued. The suggestions and the feedback on the initial manuscript received from Dr. Vinay Nangia, Univ. of Guelph, Canada have helped in improving the depth and coverage of this paper. We also acknowledge and appreciate the facilities and conducive environment provided by MSIT.

[1] R. C. Lee and W. M. Tepfenhart, “UML and C++: A Practical Guide to Object-Oriented Development”, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2000.

technology/pub/ articles/matjaz_bpel1.html. [3] R. K. Thiagarajan, A. K. Srivastava, A. K. Pujari, and V. K. Bulusu, “BPML: A Process Modeling Language for Dynamic Business Models,” in Proc. WECWIS, 2002, pp. 239–241. [4] N. R. Adam, V. Atluri, and W. Huang, “Modeling and Analysis of Workflows Using Petri Nets,” J. Intell. Inf. Syst., vol. 10, no. 2, Mar. 1998, pp. 131–158 [5] W. M. P. Van Der Aalst, “Verification of Workflow Nets,” in Proc. Appl. Theory Petri Nets(Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1248), 1997, pp. 407–426. [6] J. Ezpeleta, J. M. Colom, and J. Martinez, “A Petri Net Based Deadlock Prevention Control Policy,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., vol. 11, no. 2, Apr. 1995, pp. 173–184. [7] K. Hasegawa, P. E. Miyagi, D. J. S. Filho, K. Takahashi, L. Ma, and M. Sugisawa, “On resource arc for Petri net modeling of complex resourcesharing system,” J. Intell. Robotic Syst., vol. 26, no. 3, 1999, pp. 423–437. [8] M. Weske, “Formal Foundation And Conceptual Design Of Dynamic Adaptations In A Workflow Management System,” in Proc. HICSS-34, 2001, vol. 7, p. 7051. [9] M. Stoute, J. Wang, and D. Rosca, “Workflow Management Tool Support for Incident Command Systems,” in Proc. ICNSC 2006, Fort Lauderdale, FL, pp. 703–709. [10] M. P. Singh, G. Meredith, C. Tomlinson, and P. C. Attie, “An Event Algebra for Specifying and Scheduling Workflows,” in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Database Syst. Adv. Appl., 1995, pp. 53–60. [11] M. Reichert & P. Dadam, “ADEPTflex-Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows without Losing Control,” J. Intell. Inf. Syst., vol. 10, no. 2, 1998, pp. 93– 129. [12] J Wang, D Rosca, W Tepfenhart, A Milewski and M Stoute,“Dynamic Workflow Modeling and Analysis in Incident Command Systems”, Trans Sys, Man,

315

National Conference on Information Management in Knowledge Economy, USMS, GGSIPU, New Delhi, March 2010 Cyber-Part A: Systems And Humans, Vol.38, No.5, Sep2008, pp1041-1055 [13] J. Wang, D. Rosca, W. Tepfenhart and A. Milewski, “Incident Command Systems Workflow Modeling And Analysis: A Case Study,” presented at the 3rd Int. ISCRAM Conf., Newark, May 2006.

Demand Routing Protocols for Ad-hoc Networks – A Review,” Proc. National Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiComnet – 2004), India, pp. 341–349, Sep30 –Oct 2, 2004.

[14] P. Lawrence Ed., “Workflow Handbook 1997, Workflow Management Coalition”, Wiley, 1997.

[24] A. Q. Ansari, Moinuddin, “Towards Rough Set Based Information Systems,” Proc. International Conference on Knowledge Based Computer Systems (KBCS’98), National Centre for Software Technology, Mumbai, India, pp. 273 - 286, December 1998.

[15] William Tepfenhart, Jiacun Wang, Daniela Rosca and Anni Tsai, “Resource-Constrained and Decision Support Workflow Modeling,” International Journal Of Intelligent Control And Systems, Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2007, pp 15-23

[25] A. Q. Ansari, T. Patki, A. B. Patki, and V. Kumar, “Integrating Fuzzy Logic and Data Mining: Impact on Cyber Security,” IEEE Proc. 4th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, China, Vol. 4, pp. 498-502, August 2007.

[16] K. Van Hee, N. Sidorova, and M.Voorhoeve, “Resource-Constrained Workflow Nets,” Fundam. Inf., vol. 71, no. 2/3, pp. 243–257, 2005.

[26] Shadab. A. Siddiqui, A Q Ansari, “Mathematical Formulation for Managing Traffic Congestion for a Sector of a Route using Fuzzy Logic,” Proc.7th Hellenic European Conference on Computer Mathematics & its Applications (HERCMA), Greece, Sept. 2005.

[17] J.Wang and D. Rosca, “Dynamic Workflow Modeling And Verification,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Adv. Inf. Syst. Eng. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4001) Jun. 5-9, 2006, pp. 303–318. [18] Jian Cao, Haiyan Zhao, Jie Wang, Shensheng Zhang, Minglu Li,“Verifying Dynamic Workflow Change based on Executable Path,” International Journal Of Intelligent Control And Systems,Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2007, pp 37-44 [19] D. Rosca, S. Greenspan, and C.Wild, “Enterprise Modeling and Decision Support for Automating the Business Rules Lifecycle,” Autom. Softw. Eng.J., vol. 9, 2002, pp. 361–404. [20] P. Dourish, “Process Descriptions as Organizational Accounting Devices: The Dual Use of Workflow Technologies,” presented at the ACM GROUP 2001, Boulder, CO, Sep. 30–Oct. 3, 2001. [21]A. Q. Ansari, T. Patki, “Modeling Considerations in BPO Multiplexing Environment,” Proc. 2nd Asia Int. Conf. on Modeling and Simulation, Malaysia, pp. 132 137, May 2008. [22] A. Q. Ansari, N. Ahmad, A. Khursheed, “A Generalized Fuzzy Logic Control Software for Industrial Automation,” International Conference on CAD, CAM, Automation and Factories of Future, (INCARF’96), New Delhi, pp. 89-94 (Souvenir), December 1996. [23] Geetha Jayakumar, Moinuddin, A. Q. Ansari, “A Performance Comparison of Table Driven and On-

[27] Sapna Tyagi, M. A. Khan, A. Q. Ansari. "RFID Data Management,” Radio Frequency Identification Fundamentals and Applications Bringing Research to Practice, Chapter No. 16, pp. 229- 250, Cristina Turcu (Ed.), In-Tech Publication, Austria. February 2010. [28] A. Q. Ansari, “Multiple Valued Logic Versus Binary Logic,” C. S. I. Communications, India, Vol.20, No.5, pp.30 – 31, November 1996. [29] R. Z. Khan, K. Qureshi, A. Q. Ansari, “Adaptive Decentralized Task Scheduling Strategy for a Heterogeneous Distributed Ray Tracing System,” The Journal of the Computer Society of India, Vol.32, No.4, pp. 26 - 31, Dec. 2002. [30] A. Q. Ansari, Moinuddin, S. Deshpande, “Fuzzy Logic Control of Safety and Security Systems,” The Indian Police Journal, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 56 – 62, October–December 1998. [31] A. Q. Ansari, “The Basics of Fuzzy logic: A Tutorial Review,” Computer Education – Stafford – Computer Education Group, U.K., No. 88, pp. 5 - 9, February 1998. [32] A. Q. Ansari, Moinuddin, “Fuzzy Logic Based Computer System Security Rater: A Case Study,” Computer Education – Stafford – Computer Education Group, U.K., No. 92, pp. 8–11, June 1999.

316