Workflow Design, Logic Synthesis and Multi Level Logic Minimization

First let me try and tell you what I am babbeling on about.

What is logic synthesis?  According to Wikipedia Logic synthesis is a process by which an abstract form of desired circuit behavior (typically register transfer level (RTL) or behavioral) is turned into a design implementation in terms of logic gates.

What is Multi Level Logic Minimization?  Well once we have reduced a circuit into gates MLLM uses a series of computer algorithms to redesign the circuit using as few gates as possible.

Why should I mention this in the workflow blog?  Well first off workflow design and circuit design are VERY similar.  You only need to look at the and see how so many of the patterns are common logic circuit gates.  Second with the uptake of workflow software I think that workflows may become more complicated because the added power will allow people to create more complicated and more variable business rules (but that is a different debate).  In addition workflow systems are being used to handle larger and larger systems with more and more integration.  So effectively our workflow circuitry is getting bigger.  This means it will become more and more difficult for a mean mortal to optimize the workflow.  This is where MLLM steps in. 

Imaging one day having a system that does the requirements gathering from the users and then hitting a magic button and a workflow system is created.  This created system is not an electronic version of the current ‘AS IS’ process but a 100% optimized and re-designed system.  The time delay from when a business decision maker makes a business decision could be non-existent…..maybe I am just dreaming.

2 thoughts on “Workflow Design, Logic Synthesis and Multi Level Logic Minimization

  1. Shhhhh!!! Keep writing like that and you will have us out of a job.

    I am not sure that we will ever get reach the era where we can press a magic button and auto-generate a workflow system. Tools will become more advanced and prevent mere mortals from making common mistakes. However, I think there will always be a point of diminishing return.

    Consider software development and how far IDEs such as Visual Studio have progressed. An IDE is great for finding most bugs before you even compile. However, we would find it annoying if the IDE tried to fix the defect for us. The IDE would make mistakes and cost us more time than it would save.

    The way I see it workflow systems will continue to advance; however, we will always be needed (at least I hope).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s