Advertisement

Conformance Checking of Interacting Processes with Overlapping Instances

  • Dirk Fahland
  • Massimiliano de Leoni
  • Boudewijn F. van Dongen
  • Wil M. P. van der Aalst
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6896)

Abstract

The usefulness of process models (e.g., for analysis, improvement, or execution) strongly depends on their ability to describe reality. Conformance checking is a technique to validate how good a given process model describes recorded executions of the actual process. Recently, artifacts have been proposed as a paradigm to capture dynamic, and inter-organizational processes in a more natural way. Artifact-centric processes drop several restrictions and assumptions of classical processes. In particular, process instances cannot be considered in isolation as instances in artifact-centric processes may overlap and interact with each other. This significantly complicates conformance checking; the entanglement of different instances complicates the quantification and diagnosis of misalignments. This paper is the first paper to address this problem. We show how conformance checking of artifact-centric processes can be decomposed into a set of smaller problems that can be analyzed using conventional techniques.

Keywords

artifacts process models conformance overlapping process instances 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rozinat, A., Jong, I., Gunther, C., van der Aalst, W.: Conformance Analysis of ASML’s Test Process. In: GRCIS 2009. CEUR-WS.org, vol. 459, pp. 1–15 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rozinat, A., de Medeiros, A.K.A., Günther, C.W., Weijters, A.J.M.M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The Need for a Process Mining Evaluation Framework in Research and Practice. In: ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Benatallah, B., Paik, H.-Y. (eds.) BPM Workshops 2007. LNCS, vol. 4928, pp. 84–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greco, G., Guzzo, A., Pontieri, L., Sacca, D.: Discovering Expressive Process Models by Clustering Log Traces. IEEE Trans. on Knowl. and Data Eng. 18, 1010–1027 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Weijters, A., van der Aalst, W.: Rediscovering Workflow Models from Event-Based Data using Little Thumb. Integrated Computer-Aided Engineering 10, 151–162 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Medeiros, A., Weijters, A., van der Aalst, W.: Genetic Process Mining: An Experimental Evaluation. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 14, 245–304 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.: Conformance Checking of Processes Based on Monitoring Real Behavior. Information Systems 33, 64–95 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adriansyah, A., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Towards Robust Conformance Checking. In: Muehlen, M.z., Su, J. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops. LNBIP, vol. 66, pp. 122–133. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van der Aalst, W., Barthelmess, P., Ellis, C., Wainer, J.: Proclets: A Framework for Lightweight Interacting Workflow Processes. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 10, 443–481 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.: Business artifacts: An Approach to Operational Specification. IBM Systems Journal 42, 428–445 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohn, D., Hull, R.: Business artifacts: A data-centric approach to modeling business operations and processes. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 32, 3–9 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fritz, C., Hull, R., Su, J.: Automatic Construction of Simple Artifact-Based Business Processes. In: ICDT 2009. ACM ICPS, vol. 361, pp. 225–238 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Artifact-centric choreographies. In: Maglio, P.P., Weske, M., Yang, J., Fantinato, M. (eds.) ICSOC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6470, pp. 32–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barros, A.P., Decker, G., Dumas, M., Weber, F.: Correlation patterns in service-oriented architectures. In: Dwyer, M.B., Lopes, A. (eds.) FASE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4422, pp. 245–259. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van der Aalst, W.: Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Adriansyah, A., Sidorova, N., van Dongen, B.: Cost-based fitness in conformance checking. In: ACSD 2011 (to appear 2011) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fahland, D., de Leoni, M., van Dongen, B., van der Aalst, W.: Checking behavioral conformance of artifacts. BPM Center Report BPM-11-08, BPMcenter.org (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Verbeek, H., Buijs, J.C., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: ProM: The Process Mining Toolkit. In: BPM Demos 2010. CEUR-WS, vol. 615 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk Fahland
    • 1
  • Massimiliano de Leoni
    • 1
  • Boudewijn F. van Dongen
    • 1
  • Wil M. P. van der Aalst
    • 1
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations