Extracting Business Objects and Activities from Labels of German Process Models

To automatically analyze and compare elements of process models, investigating the natural language contained in the labels of the process models is inevitable. Therefore, the adaption of well-established techniques from the field of natural language processing to Business Process Management has recently experienced a growth. Our work contributes to the field of natural language processing in business process models by providing a word dependency-based technique for the extraction of business objects and activities from German labeled process models. Furthermore, we evaluate our approach by implementing it in the RefMod-Miner toolset and measuring the quality of the information extraction in business process models. In three different evaluation scenarios, we show the strengths of the dependency-based approach and give an outlook on how further research could benefit from the approach.

[1]  Henrik Leopold,et al.  Natural Language in Business Process Models , 2013, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing.

[2]  Günter Neumann,et al.  Dependency Parsing with Efficient Feature Extraction , 2012, KI.

[3]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Recognising Activity Labeling Styles in Business Process Models , 2011, Enterp. Model. Inf. Syst. Archit. Int. J. Concept. Model..

[4]  Joakim Nivre,et al.  Universal Stanford dependencies: A cross-linguistic typology , 2014, LREC.

[5]  Wolfgang Lezius,et al.  TIGER: Linguistic Interpretation of a German Corpus , 2004 .

[6]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG) , 2010, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[7]  Christian Biemann,et al.  GermEval 2014 Named Entity Recognition Shared Task , 2014 .

[8]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Activity labeling in process modeling: Empirical insights and recommendations , 2010, Inf. Syst..

[9]  Helmut Feldweg,et al.  GermaNet - a Lexical-Semantic Net for German , 1997 .

[10]  Ralf Laue,et al.  A comparative survey of business process similarity measures , 2012, Comput. Ind..

[11]  Leonardo Guerreiro Azevedo,et al.  Detection of naming convention violations in process models for different languages , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[12]  Peter Loos,et al.  Inductive reference model development: recent results and current challenges , 2016, GI-Jahrestagung.

[13]  Peter Loos,et al.  An Approach for Semantic Business Process Model Matching using Supervised Machine Learning , 2016, ECIS.

[14]  Rimantas Butleris,et al.  An Approach for Extracting Business Vocabularies from Business Process Models , 2013, Inf. Technol. Control..

[15]  Albert Weichselbraun,et al.  Optimizing dependency parsing throughput , 2015, 2015 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K).

[16]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  Similarity of business process models: Metrics and evaluation , 2011, Inf. Syst..

[17]  Peter Loos,et al.  The Process Model Matching Contest 2015 , 2013, EMISA.

[18]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBLINEAR: A Library for Large Linear Classification , 2008, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[19]  Hans-Georg Fill,et al.  Supporting business process improvement with natural language processing: A model-based approach , 2016, GI-Jahrestagung.

[20]  James H. Martin,et al.  Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition , 2000 .

[21]  Jan Mendling,et al.  On the refactoring of activity labels in business process models , 2012, Inf. Syst..

[22]  Danqi Chen,et al.  A Fast and Accurate Dependency Parser using Neural Networks , 2014, EMNLP.

[23]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Robust Morphological Tagging with Word Representations , 2015, NAACL.