A Semantic Model Based Framework for Regulatory Reporting Process Management

  • Manjula PilakaEmail author
  • Madhushi BandaraEmail author
  • Eamon MansoorEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 345)


As regulatory reporting involves loosely defined processes, it is a considerable challenge for data scientists and academics to extract instances of such processes from event records and analyse their characteristics e.g. whether they satisfy certain process compliance requirements. This paper proposes a software framework based on a semantic data model that helps in deriving and analysing regulatory reporting processes from event repositories. The key idea is in using business-like templates for expressing commonly used constraints associated with the definition of regulatory reporting processes and mapping these templates with those provided by an existing process definition language. A case study investigates the efficacy of the proposed solution in the case of an “Off-market bid” regulatory process. The results demonstrate the capability of the architecture in deriving process instances from a repository of Australian Company Announcements provided by the Australian Securities Exchange.


Regulatory reporting Process extraction Semantic technology Events 


  1. 1.
    Stewart, J.: American banker - price of increased regulatory burden: less time for customers.
  2. 2.
    Harrington, W., Heinzerling, L., Morgenstern, R.D. (eds.): Reforming Regulatory Impact Analysis. Routledge, Abingdon (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carroll, P.: Regulatory impact analysis: promise and reality. In: The ECPR/CRI Conference ‘Frontiers of Regulation. Assessing Scholarly Debates and Policy Challenges’. University of Bath (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dumas, M., Van der Aalst, W.M., Ter Hofstede, A.H.: Process-Aware Information Systems: Bridging People and Software Through Process Technology. Wiley, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., La Rosa, M., Santoro, F.M.: Special issue on BPM “Use Cases”. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 58(1), 1–6 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Riyanto, A.: The regulation of takeovers in Australia. Law Rev. 5(3) (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Zang, C., Fan, Y.: Complex event processing in enterprise information systems based on RFID. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 1(1), 3–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maréchaux, J.L.: Combining service-oriented architecture and event-driven architecture using an enterprise service bus. In: IBM Developer Works, pp. 1269–1275 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Etzion, O., Magid, Y., Rabinovich, E., Skarbovsky, I., Zolotorevsky, N.: Context aware computing and its utilization in event-based systems. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    van der Aalst, W., et al.: Process mining manifesto. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 169–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Der Aalst, W.: Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmitt, B.: Process mining with Process Observer and Fluxicon Disco. SAP Community Network (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    van der Aalst, W.M.: Process Mining: Data Science in Action. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). Scholar
  16. 16.
    van der Aalst, W.M., Alfredo, B., van Zelst, S.J.: RapidProM: mine your processes and not just your data (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Aalst, W.M.: Exploring the CSCW spectrum using process mining. Adv. Eng. Inform. 21(2), 191–199 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van der Aalst, W.M., Weske, M., Grünbauer, D.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data Knowl. Eng. 53(2), 129–162 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tzeremes, V., Gomaa, H.: XANA: an end user software product line framework for smart spaces. In: 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., Van der Aalst, M.P.: Declare: full support for loosely-structured processes. In: 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOC 2007. IEEE (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pesic, M., Schonenberg, M.H., Sidorova, N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Constraint-based workflow models: change made easy. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 77–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weisi, C., Rabhi, F.A.: Enabling user-driven rule management in event data analysis. Inf. Syst. Front. 18(3), 511–528 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Newman, D.: The Financial Industry Business Ontology (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hutchison, D., Mitchell, J.C.: The Semantic Web (1973)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Westergaard, M., Maggi, F.M.: Declare: a tool suite for declarative workflow modelling and enactment. BPM (Demos) 820, 1–5 (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rabhi, F.A., Guabtni, A., Yao, L.: A data model for processing financial market and news data. Int. J. Electron. Financ. 3(4), 387–403 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tsay, R.S.: Analysis of Financial Time Series, vol. 543. Wiley, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations