Abstract
Process model matching refers to the automatic detection of semantically equivalent or similar activities between two process models. The output of process model matchers is the basis for many advanced process model analysis techniques and, therefore, must be as accurate as possible. Measuring the performance of process model matchers, however, is a difficult task. On the one hand, it is hard to define which correspondences are actually correct. On the other hand, it is challenging to appropriately take the output of matchers into account, because they often produce confidence values between zero and one. In this paper, we propose the first evaluation procedure for process model matchers that addresses both of these challenges. The core idea is to rank both the computed and the desired correspondences based on their confidence values and compare them using the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. We perform an in-depth evaluation in which we apply the new evaluation procedure and illustrate how it helps gaining interesting insights.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Achichi, M., Cheatham, M., Dragisic, Z., Euzenat, J., Faria, D., Ferrara, A., Flouris, G., Fundulaki, I., Harrow, I., Ivanova, V., Jiménez-Ruiz, E., Kuss, E., Lambrix, P., Leopold, H., Li, H., Meilicke, C., Montanelli, S., Pesquita, C., Saveta, T., Shvaiko, P., Splendiani, A., Stuckenschmidt, H., Todorov, K., Trojahn, C., Zamazal, O.: Results of the ontology alignment evaluation initiative 2016. In: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1766, pp. 73-129. RWTH (2016)
Antunes, G., et al.: The process model matching contest 2015. In: 6th International Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures (2015)
Cayoglu, U., Oberweis, A., Schoknecht, A., Ullrich, M.: Triple-s: A matching approach for Petri nets on syntactic, semantic and structural level. Technical report Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) (2013)
Cayoglu, U., et al.: The process model matching contest 2013. In: 4th International Workshop on Process Model Collections: Management and Reuse (PMC-MR 2013) (2013)
Cheatham, M., Hitzler, P.: Conference v2.0: an uncertain version of the OAEI conference benchmark. In: Mika, P., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8797, pp. 33–48. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11915-1_3
Dumas, M., Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Jin, T., Wang, J., La Rosa, M., Ter Hofstede, A., Wen, L.: Efficient querying of large process model repositories. Comput. Ind. 64(1), 41–49 (2013)
Klinkmüller, C., Weber, I., Mendling, J., Leopold, H., Ludwig, A.: Increasing recall of process model matching by improved activity label matching. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 211–218. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40176-3_17
Kuss, E., Leopold, H., van der Aa, H., Stuckenschmidt, H., Reijers, H.A.: Probabilistic evaluation of process model matching techniques. In: Comyn-Wattiau, I., Tanaka, K., Song, I.-Y., Yamamoto, S., Saeki, M. (eds.) ER 2016. LNCS, vol. 9974, pp. 279–292. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46397-1_22
Küster, J.M., Gerth, C., Förster, A., Engels, G.: Detecting and resolving process model differences in the absence of a change log. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 244–260. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7_19
La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Uba, R., Dijkman, R.: Business process model merging: an approach to business process consolidation. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. (TOSEM) 22(2), 11 (2013)
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). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32885-5_25
Mena, E., Kashyap, V., Illarramendi, A., Sheth, A.: Imprecise answers in distributed environments: estimation of information loss for multi-ontology based query processing. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 9(04), 403–425 (2000)
Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.A.: A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB J. 10(4), 334–350 (2001)
Sagi, T., Gal, A.: Non-binary evaluation for schema matching. In: Atzeni, P., Cheung, D., Ram, S. (eds.) ER 2012. LNCS, vol. 7532, pp. 477–486. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-34002-4_37
Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: Ontology matching: state of the art and future challenges. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 25(1), 158–176 (2013)
Spearman, C.: The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am. J. Psychol. 15(1), 72–101 (1904)
Weidlich, M., Dijkman, R., Mendling, J.: The ICoP framework: identification of correspondences between process models. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) CAiSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 483–498. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13094-6_37
Weidlich, M., Sheetrit, E., Branco, M.C., Gal, A.: Matching business process models using positional passage-based language models. In: Ng, W., Storey, V.C., Trujillo, J.C. (eds.) ER 2013. LNCS, vol. 8217, pp. 130–137. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41924-9_12
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kuss, E., Leopold, H., Meilicke, C., Stuckenschmidt, H. (2017). Ranking-Based Evaluation of Process Model Matching. In: Panetto, H., et al. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems. OTM 2017 Conferences. OTM 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10573. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69462-7_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69462-7_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69461-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69462-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)