Skip to main content

Ranking-Based Evaluation of Process Model Matching

(Short Paper)

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems. OTM 2017 Conferences (OTM 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 10573))

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Antunes, G., et al.: The process model matching contest 2015. In: 6th International Workshop on Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  4. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  5. 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

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dumas, M., Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. 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)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. 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)

    Google Scholar 

  12. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. 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)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.A.: A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB J. 10(4), 334–350 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: Ontology matching: state of the art and future challenges. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 25(1), 158–176 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Spearman, C.: The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am. J. Psychol. 15(1), 72–101 (1904)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elena Kuss .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics