Dynamic Routing and Operational Controls in Workflow Management Systems

References

• Bailey A. An OIS model for internal accounting control evaluation. ACM Trans. Office Inform. Systems (1983) 1(1, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
• Bailey A. TICOM and the analysis of internal controls. Accounting Rev.LX(2, AprilGoogle Scholar
• Brant D., Miranker D. Index support for rule activation. Proc. 1993 SIGMOD Conf. (1993) MayCrossref, Google Scholar
• Bussler C., Jablonski S. Implementing agent coordination for workflow management systems using active database systems. Proc. IEEE Internat. Workshop on Res. Issues in Data Engrg. Active Databases Systems (1994a) Feb 14–15Houston, TXCrossref, Google Scholar
• Bussler C., Jablonski S. An approach to integrate workflow modeling and organization modeling in an enterprise. Proc. 3rd IEEE Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (1994b) April 17–19Morgantown, WVCrossref, Google Scholar
• Cao T., Sanderson A. C. Task sequence planning using fuzzy Petri Nets. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man and Cybernetics (1995) 25(5, MayGoogle Scholar
• Compton M. M., Wolfe S. Intelligent validation and routing of electronic forms in a distributed workflow environment. Proc. Tenth Conf. Artificial Intelligence for Applications (1994) 1–4 MarchSan Antonio, TXCrossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper T., Wogrin N.Rule-based Programming with OPS (1988) (5. Morgan-Kaufman Publishers, San Mateo, CA) Google Scholar
• Daniels R. L., Mazzola J. B. Flow shop scheduling with resource flexibility. Oper. Res. (1994) 42(3):504–522Link, Google Scholar
• Davenport T.Business Process Innovation (1993) (HBS Press, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
• Date C.An Introduction to Database Systems (1986) 14th ed.(Addison Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• Du W., Peterson S., Shan M. C. Enterprise workflow architecture. Proc. Eleventh Internat. Conf. Data Engrg. (1995) March 6–10Taipei, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
• Ellis C. A. (1995) . Personal communicationGoogle Scholar
• Ellis C. A., Nutt G. J. Office information systems and computer science. ACM Comput. Surveys (1980) 12(1, MarchGoogle Scholar
• Ellis C. A., Nutt G. J. Modeling and enactment of workflow systems. Proc. 14th Internat. Conf. Applications and Theory of Petri Nets (1993) June 21–25Chicago, ILCrossref, Google Scholar
• Fritz F., Lau H. Workflow requirements for enterprise applications. Proc. IEEE Compcon (1994) MarchCrossref, Google Scholar
• Gulla J. A., Lindland O. I. Modeling cooperative work for workflow management. Proc. 6th Internat. Conf. CAiSE '94 (1994) June 6–10Utrecht, NetherlandsCrossref, Google Scholar
• Hammer M., Champy J.Reengineering the Corporation (1993) (Harper Business Publishers, New York) Google Scholar
• Hanson E. N. Rule condition testing and action execution in ariel. Proc. 1992 ACMSIGMOD Internat. Conf. Management of Data (1992) JuneCrossref, Google Scholar
• Homem de Mello L. S., Sanderson A. C. Representations for mechanical assembly sequences. IEEE Trans. Robotics and Automation (1991) 7(2, AprilGoogle Scholar
• Hsu M. Transaction processing and workflow management. Proc. Workflow 94 (1991, 1994) . March Boston, MA.Proc. IEEE CompconGoogle Scholar
• Korth H., Silberschatz A.Database Systems Concepts (1991) 2nd ed.(McGraw Hill, Singapore) Google Scholar
• Kumar A. A new approach for conflict resolution and rule processing in a knowledge-based system. Proc. Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (1990) DecemberCopenhagenGoogle Scholar
• Levine L. O., Aurand S. S. Evaluating automated work-flow systems for administrative processes. Interfaces (1994) 24(5):141–151Link, Google Scholar
• Leymann F., Altenhuber W. Managing business processes as an information resource. IBM Systems J. (1994) 33(2Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leymann F., Roller D. Business process management with flowmark. Proc. IEEE Compcon (1994) MarchCrossref, Google Scholar
• McCarthy D., Dayal U. The architecture of an active, object-oriented database system. Proc. ACM SIGMOD (1989) Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
• Medina-Mora R. et al. The action workflow approach to work- flow management technology. CSCW 92 Proc. (1992) NovemberCrossref, Google Scholar
• Miranker D. TREAT: A better match algorithm for production systems. Proc. AAAI 87 Conf. Artificial Intelligence (1987) AugustGoogle Scholar
• Miranker D., Brant D. An algorithmic basis for integrating production and database systems. Proc. Sixth Internat. Conf. Data Engrg. (1990) FebruaryCrossref, Google Scholar
• Murata T. Petri Nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proc. IEEE (1989) 77(4):541–580Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olender K. M., Osterweil L. J. Cecil: A sequencing constraint language for automatic static analysis generation. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (1990) 16(3, MarchGoogle Scholar
• Rajan V. N., Nof S. Y. Minimal precedence constraints for integrated assembly and execution planning. IEEE Trans. Robotics Automation (1996) 12(2, AprilGoogle Scholar
• Rusinkiewicz M., Sheth A. Specification and execution of transactional workflows. (1993) . Bellcore technical reportGoogle Scholar
• Schlatter M. The Business object management system. IBM Systems J. (1994) 33(2Crossref, Google Scholar
• Segev Arie, Leon Zhao J. Rule management in expert database systems. Management Sci. (1994) 40(6):685–707Link, Google Scholar
• Sellis T., Lin C.-C., Raschid L. Coupling production systems and database systems: A homogeneous approach. IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engrg. (1993) 5(2, AprilGoogle Scholar
• Sheth Amit. Proc. NSF Workshop on Workflow and Process Automation in Information Systems: State of the Art and Future Directions (1996) May 8–10Athens, GAGoogle Scholar
• Stohr Edward A., Leon Zhao J. A technology adaptation model for business process automation. Proc. 30th Ann. Hawaii Internat. Conf. Systems Sci. (1997) JanuaryCrossref, Google Scholar
• Strong D. Decision support for exception handling and quality control in office operations. Decision Support Systems (1992) 9:217–227Crossref, Google Scholar
• van der Aalst W. M. P. Petri-net-based workflow management software. (1996) . NSF Workshop on Workflow and Process Automation, Athens, Georgia, May 8–10Google Scholar
• Vandenbosch B., Ginzberg M. J. Lotus Notes and collaboration: Le plus ca change. Proc. Twenty-Ninth Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci. (1996) 33–6 JanuaryWailea:61–71Google Scholar
• WFMC Workflow reference model. (1994) . Technical report, Work- flow Management Coalition, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
• Zisman M. Office automation: Revolution or evolution. Sloan Management Rev. (1978) 19(3):1–16Google Scholar