Complete and Interpretable Conformance Checking of Business Processes

This article presents a method for checking the conformance between an event log capturing the actual execution of a business process, and a model capturing its expected or normative execution. Given a process model and an event log, the method returns a set of statements in natural language describing the behavior allowed by the model but not observed in the log and vice versa. The method relies on a unified representation of process models and event logs based on a well-known model of concurrency, namely event structures. Specifically, the problem of conformance checking is approached by converting the event log into an event structure, converting the process model into another event structure, and aligning the two event structures via an error-correcting synchronized product. Each difference detected in the synchronized product is then verbalized as a natural language statement. An empirical evaluation shows that the proposed method can handle real datasets and produces more concise and higher-level difference descriptions than state-of-the-art conformance checking methods. In a survey designed according to the technology acceptance model, practitioners showed a preference towards the proposed method with respect to a state-of-the-art baseline.

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

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

[3]  Bart Baesens,et al.  A robust F-measure for evaluating discovered process models , 2011, 2011 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM).

[4]  Jayme Luiz Szwarcfiter,et al.  A search strategy for the elementary cycles of a directed graph , 1976 .

[5]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Conformance Checking Using Cost-Based Fitness Analysis , 2011, 2011 IEEE 15th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference.

[6]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Workflow Mining: Current Status and Future Directions , 2003, OTM.

[7]  Antti Valmari,et al.  A stubborn attack on state explosion , 1990, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[8]  Dirk Fahland,et al.  Analysis on demand: Instantaneous soundness checking of industrial business process models , 2011, Data Knowl. Eng..

[9]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Petri Nets, Event Structures and Domains, Part I , 1981, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Walter Vogler,et al.  An Improvement of McMillan's Unfolding Algorithm , 1996, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[11]  Niko Kleiner,et al.  Delta analysis with workflow logs: aligning business process prescriptions and their reality , 2005, Requirements Engineering.

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

[13]  T. Curran,et al.  SAP R/3 Business Blueprint: Understanding the Business Process Reference Model , 1997 .

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

[15]  Javier Esparza Model Checking Using Net Unfoldings , 1994, Sci. Comput. Program..

[16]  Bart Baesens,et al.  An Improved Process Event Log Artificial Negative Event Generator , 2012 .

[17]  Vaughan R. Pratt,et al.  Modeling concurrency with partial orders , 1986, International Journal of Parallel Programming.

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

[19]  Wil M.P. van der Aalst,et al.  Genetic Process Mining , 2005, ICATPN.

[20]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  Semantics and analysis of business process models in BPMN , 2008, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[21]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Process Mining Reloaded: Event Structures as a Unified Representation of Process Models and Event Logs , 2015, Petri Nets.

[22]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Workflow mining: discovering process models from event logs , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[23]  Dirk Fahland,et al.  Model repair - aligning process models to reality , 2015, Inf. Syst..

[24]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Improving Business Process Models Using Observed Behavior , 2012, SIMPDA.

[25]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths , 1968, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern..

[26]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  BPMN Miner: Automated discovery of BPMN process models with hierarchical structure , 2016, Inf. Syst..

[27]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Business Process Conformance Checking Based on Event Structures , 2015 .

[28]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  A technique of state space search based on unfolding , 1995, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[29]  Alexander L. Wolf,et al.  Event-Based Detection of Concurrency , 2006 .

[30]  Joost Engelfriet,et al.  Branching processes of Petri nets , 1991, Acta Informatica.

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

[32]  James C. Tiernan,et al.  An efficient search algorithm to find the elementary circuits of a graph , 1970, CACM.

[33]  Andy P. Field,et al.  Discovering Statistics Using SPSS , 2000 .

[34]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Workflow Patterns , 2004, Distributed and Parallel Databases.

[35]  Josep Carmona,et al.  A Fresh Look at Precision in Process Conformance , 2010, BPM.

[36]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  APROMORE: An advanced process model repository , 2011, Expert Syst. Appl..

[37]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[38]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Diagnosing behavioral differences between business process models: An approach based on event structures , 2016, Inf. Syst..

[39]  Hajo A. Reijers,et al.  Balanced multi-perspective checking of process conformance , 2016, Computing.

[40]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Log Delta Analysis: Interpretable Differencing of Business Process Event Logs , 2015, BPM.