IP Library Granted Patent US 8,689,060
Granted Patent B2
US 8,689,060 · App. 13/296,858 · Granted Apr 1, 2014

Process model error correction

Inventor: Soeren Balko (Weinheim, DE)
Assignee: SAP AG
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 8,689,060
App. No.
13/296,858
Granted
Apr 1, 2014
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method for providing corrections for semantic errors in a process model can be implemented on a computer. The method can include identifying a change in the process model, the process model including one or more process model elements. The method can also include identifying one or more constraint violations for at least one of the one or more process model elements, and identifying one or more correction proposals for each constraint violation identified.

Claims (39)

1. A computer implemented method for providing corrections for semantic errors in a process model, the method comprising:

identifying a change in the process model, the process model including one or more process model elements;

identifying one or more constraint violations associated with at least one process model element in response to identifying the change in the process model;

identifying one or more correction proposals for each constraint violation identified;

creating a first bit string representative of the at least one process model element;

receiving a user selection of a correction proposal from the one or more identified correction proposals;

creating a second bit string of a current version of the at least one process model element;

applying the selected correction proposal in response to determining that the first bit string is the same as the second bit string; and

discarding the selected correction proposal in response to determining that the second bit string differs from the first bit string.

2. The computer implemented method of claim 1 further comprising:

identifying a severity of the constraint violation; and

automatically applying at least one correction proposal for constraint violation severities that indicate a run-time error.

3. The computer implemented method of claim 1 further comprising:

identifying a severity of the constraint violation; and

requesting approval of at least one correction proposal for constraint violation severities that indicate that a run-time error is possible.

4. The computer implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the bit string is a fingerprint of a process model fragment, uniquely representing a state of the process model fragment.

5. The computer implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the bit string is a checksum.

6. A system for providing corrections for semantic errors in a process model, the system comprising:

a memory for storing instructions; and

at least one hardware processor configured to execute instructions, the instructions comprising:

identifying a change in the process model, the process model including one or more process model elements;

identifying one or more constraint violations associated with at least one process model element in response to identifying the change in the process model;

identifying one or more correction proposals for each constraint violation identified;

creating a first bit string representative of the at least one process model element;

receiving a user selection of a correction proposal from the one or more identified correction proposals;

creating a second bit string of a current version of the at least one process model element;

applying the selected correction proposal in response to determining that the first bit string is the same as the second bit string; and

discarding the selected correction proposal in response to determining that the second bit string differs from the first bit string.

7. The system of claim 6 , wherein the instructions further comprise:

identifying a severity of the constraint violation; and

automatically applying at least one correction proposal for constraint violation seventies that indicate a run-time error.

8. The system of claim 6 , wherein the instructions further comprise:

identifying a severity of the constraint violation; and

requesting approval of at least one correction proposal for constraint violation seventies that indicate that a run-time error is possible.

9. The system of claim 6 , wherein the bit string is a fingerprint of a process model fragment, uniquely representing a state of the process model fragment.

10. The system of claim 6 , wherein the bit string is a checksum.

11. A non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing computer-readable instructions executable by a computer, the instructions operable when executed to: identify one or more constraint violations in a process model, the process model including one or more process model elements, the one or more constraint violations associated with at least one process model element; identify one or more correction proposals for each constraint violation identified; create a first bit string representative of the at least one process model element; receive a user selection of a correction proposal from the one or more identified correction proposals; create a second bit string of a current version of the at least one process model element; apply the selected correction proposal in response to determining that the first bit string is the same as the second bit string; and discard the selected correction proposal in response to determining that the second bit string differs from the first bit string.

12. The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 11 , wherein the operations further comprise instructions are further operable when executed to: identify a severity of the constraint violation; and automatically apply at least one correction proposal for constraint violation severities that indicate a run-time error.

13. The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 11 , wherein the instructions further comprise: identify a severity of the constraint violation; and request approval of at least one correction proposal for constraint violation severities that indicate that a run-time error is possible.

Assignments (2)
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Aug 26, 2014
From: SAP AG
To: SAP SE
Reel/Frame 033625/0334 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 21, 2011
From: BALKO, SOEREN, DR.
To: SAP AG
Reel/Frame 027425/0337 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20130124927A1 · May 16, 2013