Anti-alignments in Conformance Checking - The Dark Side of Process Models

Conformance checking techniques asses the suitability of a process model in representing an underlying process, observed through a collection of real executions. These techniques suffer from the well-known state space explosion problem, hence handling process models exhibiting large or even infinite state spaces remains a challenge. One important metric in conformance checking is to asses the precision of the model with respect to the observed executions, i.e., characterize the ability of the model to produce behavior unrelated to the one observed. By avoiding the computation of the full state space of a model, current techniques only provide estimations of the precision metric, which in some situations tend to be very optimistic, thus hiding real problems a process model may have. In this paper we present the notion of anti-alignment as a concept to help unveiling traces in the model that may deviate significantly from the observed behavior. Using anti-alignments, current estimations can be improved, e.g., in precision checking. We show how to express the problem of finding anti-alignments as the satisfiability of a Boolean formula, and provide a tool which can deal with large models efficiently.

[1]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Process Discovery Using Localized Events , 2015, Petri Nets.

[2]  A. Slisenko Studies in constructive mathematics and mathematical logic , 1969 .

[3]  Jorge Muñoz Gama Conformance checking and diagnosis in process mining , 2014 .

[4]  Bart Baesens,et al.  Determining Process Model Precision and Generalization with Weighted Artificial Negative Events , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[5]  Moe Thandar Wynn,et al.  Estimating completeness of event logs , 2012 .

[6]  Jorge Munoz-Gama,et al.  Conformance Checking and Diagnosis in Process Mining , 2016, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing.

[7]  Iain A. Stewart Reachability in Some Classes of Acyclic Petri Nets , 1995, Fundam. Informaticae.

[8]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Measuring precision of modeled behavior , 2015, Inf. Syst. E Bus. Manag..

[9]  Josep Carmona,et al.  Event-Based Real-Time Decomposed Conformance Analysis , 2014, OTM Conferences.

[10]  Hans Kleine Büning,et al.  Theory of Quantified Boolean Formulas , 2021, Handbook of Satisfiability.

[11]  A Arya Adriansyah,et al.  Aligning observed and modeled behavior , 2014 .

[12]  G. S. Tseitin On the Complexity of Derivation in Propositional Calculus , 1983 .

[13]  Tadao Murata,et al.  Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications , 1989, Proc. IEEE.

[14]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior , 2008, Inf. Syst..

[15]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Quality Dimensions in Process Discovery: The Importance of Fitness, Precision, Generalization and Simplicity , 2014, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[16]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Single-Entry Single-Exit decomposed conformance checking , 2014, Inf. Syst..

[17]  Niklas Sörensson,et al.  An Extensible SAT-solver , 2003, SAT.

[18]  Jens Palsberg,et al.  Complexity Results for 1-Safe Nets , 1993, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[19]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Process Mining - Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes , 2011 .