Encyclopedia of Big Data Technologies

Living Edition
| Editors: Sherif Sakr, Albert Zomaya

Process Model Repair

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63962-8_90-1

Definition

In the context of Process Mining, Process model repair is a model enhancement operation for reconciling a set of existing differences between an event log and a model. The aim of this operation is to reconcile the set of differences while preserving, as much as possible, the resemblance between the original and the repaired model.

Overview

Business processes are core assets in modern organizations. Oftentimes they are captured as models to ease their understanding for the involved participants and enable the identification and prevention of issues that could arise during their execution. In addition to their descriptive nature, process models can be also prescriptive since they can be used to automate the process executions. Thus, it is crucial that process models stay up to date and reflect the intended behavior.

Modern information systems supporting business processes can maintain detailed data about the executions of such processes. This data can be extracted as event...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Armas Cervantes A, van Beest NRTP, Rosa ML, Dumas M, García-Bañuelos L (2017) Interactive and incremental business process model repair. Springer International Publishing, pp 53–74Google Scholar
  2. Buijs JCAM, van Dongen BF, van der Aalst WMP (2012) On the role of fitness, precision, generalization and simplicity in process discovery. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33606-5_19
  3. Dees M, de Leoni M, Mannhardt F (2017) Enhancing process models to improve business performance: a methodology and case studies. Springer, pp 232–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69462-7_15
  4. Dijkman R, Dumas M, García-Bañuelos L (2009) Graph matching algorithms for business process model similarity search. Springer, Heidelberg/Berlin, pp 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03848-8_5
  5. Dijkman R, Dumas M, van Dongen B, Käärik R, Mendling J (2011) Similarity of business process models: metrics and evaluation. Inf Syst 36(2):498–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2010.09.006
  6. Fahland D, van der Aalst WM (2015) Model repair – aligning process models to reality. Inf Syst 47: 220–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2013.12.007
  7. García-Bañuelos L, van Beest NR, Dumas M, La Rosa M (2015) Complete and interpretable conformance checking of business processes. Technical report, BPM Center. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/91552/
  8. Polyvyanyy A, Aalst WMPVD, Hofstede AHMT, Wynn MT (2016) Impact-driven process model repair. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 25(4):1–60. https://doi.org/10.1145/2980764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Rogge-Solti A, Senderovich A, Weidlich M, JanMendling, Gal A (2016) In log and model we trust? a generalized conformance checking framework, Springer International Publishing, pp 179–196Google Scholar
  10. van der Aalst W (2011) Process mining. Discovery, conformance and enhancement of business processes. Springer-Verlag Berlin HeidelbergGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Section editors and affiliations

  • Marlon Dumas
    • 1
  • Matthias Weidlich
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of TartuTartuEstonia