Design Principles for Comprehensible Process Discovery in Process Mining

“Spaghetti-like” process models discovered through process mining are challenging to comprehend, especially, for inexperienced users. But, at the same time, they contain potential insights for decisionmakers. Designing process discovery techniques that work well in both aspects – being comprehensible and providing valuable information, for various data sets – is a challenging task in process mining. Therefore, we adopt metrics from various disciplines such as information theory, business process modelling, process mining, graph aesthetics, and cognitive load theory to define design principles for process discovery techniques in regards to model characteristics and visual layout principles. Each of the design principles includes a metric and reference value to ensure their testability and to provide quantitative orientation to designers. To assure that model comprehensibility does not come at the cost of losing essential information, we introduce an entropy-based measure as a boundary condition that expresses the amount of information a model encodes. We assess the effectiveness of the design principles in terms of their applicability in an experimental evaluation with synthetic and real-world event log data.

[1]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Managing Process Model Complexity via Concrete Syntax Modifications , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[2]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Challenges and Recommendations of Literature Search in Information Systems Research , 2015, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Jan Mendling,et al.  A Study Into the Factors That Influence the Understandability of Business Process Models , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[4]  Jörg Becker,et al.  Comprehensible Predictive Models for Business Processes , 2016, MIS Q..

[5]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Trace Clustering in Process Mining , 2008, Business Process Management Workshops.

[6]  Robert F. Cohen,et al.  Validating Graph Drawing Aesthetics , 1995, GD.

[7]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  Prescriptive Knowledge in IS Research: Conceptualizing Design Principles in Terms of Materiality, Action, and Boundary Conditions , 2015, 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[8]  van der Wmp Wil Aalst,et al.  Using hidden Markov models to evaluate the quality of discovered process models , 2008 .

[9]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Context Aware Trace Clustering: Towards Improving Process Mining Results , 2009, SDM.

[10]  Jan Mendling,et al.  What Makes Process Models Understandable? , 2007, BPM.

[11]  Mark Strembeck,et al.  Influence Factors of Understanding Business Process Models , 2008, BIS.

[12]  David A. Carrington,et al.  Empirical Evaluation of Aesthetics-based Graph Layout , 2002, Empirical Software Engineering.

[13]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Quality Assessment of Business Process Models Based on Thresholds , 2010, OTM Conferences.

[14]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Complexity metrics for Workflow nets , 2009, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[15]  Jan Mendling,et al.  A study on the effects of routing symbol design on process model comprehension , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[16]  Bart Baesens,et al.  A multi-dimensional quality assessment of state-of-the-art process discovery algorithms using real-life event logs , 2012, Inf. Syst..

[17]  Weidong Huang,et al.  Towards a Cognitive Approach to User-Centered Visualization Design and Evaluation , 2014, VINCI '14.

[18]  Peter Eades,et al.  Graph drawing algorithms , 2010 .

[19]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Discovering more precise process models from event logs by filtering out chaotic activities , 2017, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems.

[20]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Finding Structure in Unstructured Processes: The Case for Process Mining , 2007, Seventh International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD 2007).

[21]  Colin Ware,et al.  Cognitive Measurements of Graph Aesthetics , 2002, Inf. Vis..

[22]  Helen C. Purchase,et al.  Metrics for Graph Drawing Aesthetics , 2002, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[23]  Samir Chatterjee,et al.  A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research , 2008 .

[24]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[25]  Neil A. Ernst,et al.  A Framework for Empirical Evaluation of Model Comprehensibility , 2007, International Workshop on Modeling in Software Engineering (MISE'07: ICSE Workshop 2007).

[26]  Palash Bera Does Cognitive Overload Matter in Understanding Bpmn Models? , 2012, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[27]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  POSITIONING AND PRESENTING DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH FOR MAXIMUM IMPACT 1 , 2013 .

[28]  Carlo Batini,et al.  Automatic graph drawing and readability of diagrams , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[29]  Jae-Yoon Jung Measuring Entropy in Business Process Models , 2008, 2008 3rd International Conference on Innovative Computing Information and Control.

[30]  Jorge S. Cardoso,et al.  An entropy-based uncertainty measure of process models , 2011, Inf. Process. Lett..

[31]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Data Science in Action , 2016 .

[32]  Massimo Mecella,et al.  Automated Discovery of Process Models from Event Logs: Review and Benchmark , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[33]  Mikhail J. Atallah,et al.  Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook , 2009, Chapman & Hall/CRC Applied Algorithms and Data Structures series.

[34]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Process Mining: Overview and Outlook of Petri Net Discovery Algorithms , 2009, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[35]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Analyzing “Spaghetti Processes” , 2011 .

[36]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  On the Role of Fitness, Precision, Generalization and Simplicity in Process Discovery , 2012, OTM Conferences.

[37]  Alexander L. Wolf,et al.  Event-based detection of concurrency , 1998, SIGSOFT '98/FSE-6.

[38]  Matthias Dehmer,et al.  A history of graph entropy measures , 2011, Inf. Sci..

[39]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Thresholds for error probability measures of business process models , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..

[40]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  An alignment-based framework to check the conformance of declarative process models and to preprocess event-log data , 2015, Inf. Syst..

[41]  Michael Jünger,et al.  A branch-and-cut approach to the crossing number problem , 2008, Discret. Optim..

[42]  Marlon Dumas,et al.  Metaheuristic Optimization for Automated Business Process Discovery , 2019, BPM.

[43]  Ralf Laue,et al.  Influence factors for local comprehensibility of process models , 2015, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[44]  Stefan Jablonski,et al.  Multi-Perspective Clustering of Process Execution Traces , 2019, Enterp. Model. Inf. Syst. Archit. Int. J. Concept. Model..

[45]  Mark Strembeck,et al.  Factors of process model comprehension - Findings from a series of experiments , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..

[46]  Daniel Moody,et al.  What Makes a Good Diagram? Improving the Cognitive Effectiveness of Diagrams in IS Development , 2006 .

[47]  Marjan Hericko,et al.  Improving cognitive effectiveness of business process diagrams with opacity-driven graphical highlights , 2017, Decis. Support Syst..

[48]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Genetic process mining: an experimental evaluation , 2007, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

[49]  Jan Mendling,et al.  How visual cognition influences process model comprehension , 2017, Decis. Support Syst..

[50]  Luigi Pontieri,et al.  Discovering expressive process models by clustering log traces , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[51]  Michael Gleicher,et al.  A Framework for Considering Comprehensibility in Modeling , 2016, Big Data.

[52]  Jan Verelst,et al.  Using Entropy's Justificatory Knowledge for a Business Process Design Theory , 2014, 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[53]  Daniel L. Sherrell,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems , 1999 .

[54]  Foster J. Provost,et al.  Explaining Data-Driven Document Classifications , 2013, MIS Q..