Abstract
Business process modeling has become an integral part of many organizations for documenting and redesigning complex organizational operations. However, the increasing size of process model repositories calls for automated quality assurance techniques. While many aspects such as formal and structural problems are well understood, there is only a limited understanding of semantic issues caused by natural language. One particularly severe problem arises when modelers employ natural language for expressing control-flow constructs such as gateways or loops. This may not only negatively affect the understandability of process models, but also the performance of analysis tools, which typically assume that process model elements do not encode control-flow related information in natural language. In this paper, we aim at increasing the current understanding of mixing natural and modeling language and therefore exploratively investigate three process model collections from practice. As a result, we identify a set of nine anti patterns for mixing natural and modeling language.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Rosemann, M.: Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part A. Bus. Process Manage. J. 12(2), 249–254 (2006)
Becker, J., Rosemann, M., von Uthmann, C.: Guidelines of business process modeling. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 30–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Davis, R.: Aris Design Platform: Advanced Process Modelling and Administration. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: On the refactoring of activity labels in business process models. Inf. Syst. 37(5), 443–459 (2012)
Pittke, F., Leopold, H., Mendling, J.: Spotting terminology deficiencies in process model repositories. In: Nurcan, S., Proper, H.A., Soffer, P., Krogstie, J., Schmidt, R., Halpin, T., Bider, I. (eds.) BPMDS 2013 and EMMSAD 2013. LNBIP, vol. 147, pp. 292–307. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Fahland, D., Favre, C., Koehler, J., Lohmann, N., Völzer, H., Wolf, K.: Analysis on demand: instantaneous soundness checking of industrial business process models. Data Knowl. Eng. 70(5), 448–466 (2011)
Sun, S., Zhao, J., Nunamaker, J., Liu Sheng, O.: Formulating the data-flow perspective for business process management. Inf. Syst. Res. 17(4), 374–391 (2006)
Sidorova, N., Stahl, C., Trcka, N.: Soundness verification for conceptual workflow nets with data: early detection of errors with the most precision possible. Inf. Syst. 36(7), 1026–1043 (2011)
Weber, B., Reichert, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Refactoring large process model repositories. Comput. Ind. 62(5), 467–486 (2011)
Polyvyanyy, A., García-Bañuelos, L., Dumas, M.: Structuring acyclic process models. In: Hull, R., Mendling, J., Tai, S. (eds.) BPM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6336, pp. 276–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: Recognising activity labeling styles in business process models. Enterp. Model. Inf. Syst. Architect. 6(1), 16–29 (2011)
Leopold, H., Eid-Sabbagh, R.H., Mendling, J., Azevedo, L.G., Baião, F.A.: Detection of naming convention violations in process models for different languages. Decis. Support Syst. 56, 310–325 (2013)
Dehnert, J., Rittgen, P.: Relaxed soundness of business processes. In: Dittrich, K.R., Geppert, A., Norrie, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2068, pp. 157–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Workflow verification: finding control-flow errors using petri-net-based techniques. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 161–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., de Beer, H.T., van Dongen, B.F.: Process mining and verification of properties: an approach based on temporal logic. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3760, pp. 130–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Detecting common errors in event-driven process chains by label analysis. Enterp. Model. Inf. Syst. Architect. 6(1), 3–15 (2011)
Keller, G., Teufel, T.: SAP(R) R/3 Process Oriented Implementation: Iterative Process Prototyping. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1998)
Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., van Dongen, B.F., Käärik, R., Mendling, J.: Similarity of business process models: metrics and evaluation. Inf. Syst. 36(2), 498–516 (2011)
Dijkman, R., Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L.: Graph matching algorithms for business process model similarity search. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Leopold, H., Niepert, M., Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Probabilistic optimization of semantic process model matching. In: Barros, A., Gal, A., Kindler, E. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7481, pp. 319–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Weske, M.: Efficient consistency measurement based on behavioral profiles of process models. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 37(3), 410–429 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pittke, F., Leopold, H., Mendling, J. (2015). When Language Meets Language: Anti Patterns Resulting from Mixing Natural and Modeling Language. In: Fournier, F., Mendling, J. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2014. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 202. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15895-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15895-2_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-15894-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-15895-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)