Fusion Miner: Process discovery for mixed-paradigm models

The research area of business process mining has vastly matured in recent years. Its main focus centers around the extraction and analysis of process models from event logs. A strong emphasis lies on the automatic discovery of models for which numerous algorithms have been proposed already. So far, most discovery algorithms were limited to the derivation of single-paradigm models, which contain either procedural or declarative constructs, targeting the mining of strict and flexible processes respectively. This paper proposes the first fully-automated mining technique to discover procedural workflows combined with Declare templates to capture processes that are difficult to mine with only a single paradigm, e.g., workflows with different layers of flexibility.This approach provides process analysts with new discovery capabilities, including the retrieval of better fitting and more precise models with high comprehensibility. The main contribution consists of the Fusion Miner algorithm, which has been implemented in the process mining framework ProM as a plug-in. The first approach to offer a way to analyze process-oriented data in a mixed-paradigm fashion, i.e., one that mixes declarative and procedural models in a single state space. The outcome yields fit and precise process models that better support practitioners in judging the quality of their as-is business processes.An overview of how mixed-paradigm process models with intertwined state spaces can improve over single-paradigm approaches.A preliminary approach towards conformance checking of mixed-paradigm models.Three elaborate examples which explain how mixed-paradigm models can excel at capturing logs with different layers of flexibility.

[1]  Jan Vanthienen,et al.  Information mining - Reflections on recent advancements and the road ahead in data, text, and media mining , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[2]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  User-guided discovery of declarative process models , 2011, 2011 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM).

[3]  Evelina Lamma,et al.  Inducing Declarative Logic-Based Models from Labeled Traces , 2007, BPM.

[4]  Jan Mendling,et al.  Declarative versus Imperative Process Modeling Languages: The Issue of Understandability , 2009, BMMDS/EMMSAD.

[5]  Wil M.P. van der Aalst,et al.  Process mining with the HeuristicsMiner algorithm , 2006 .

[6]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Efficient Discovery of Understandable Declarative Process Models from Event Logs , 2012, CAiSE.

[7]  Hajo A. Reijers,et al.  UnconstrainedMiner: Efficient Discovery of Generalized Declarative Process Models , 2013 .

[8]  Akhil Kumar,et al.  Process Materialization Using Templates and Rules to Design Flexible Process Models , 2009, RuleML.

[9]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Applications and Theory of Petri Nets , 1983, Informatik-Fachberichte.

[10]  Manfred Reichert,et al.  Understanding Declare models: strategies, pitfalls, empirical results , 2016, Software & Systems Modeling.

[11]  Hajo A. Reijers,et al.  The Automated Discovery of Hybrid Processes , 2014, BPM.

[12]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Fuzzy Mining - Adaptive Process Simplification Based on Multi-perspective Metrics , 2007, BPM.

[13]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  DECLARE: Full Support for Loosely-Structured Processes , 2007, 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2007).

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

[15]  Cw Christian Günther,et al.  Process mining: Using CPN tools to create test logs for mining algorithms , 2005 .

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

[17]  Yen-Liang Chen,et al.  Mining association rules with multiple minimum supports: a new mining algorithm and a support tuning mechanism , 2004, Decision Support Systems.

[18]  Evelina Lamma,et al.  Exploiting Inductive Logic Programming Techniques for Declarative Process Mining , 2009, Trans. Petri Nets Other Model. Concurr..

[19]  Jörg Desel,et al.  Application and Theory of Petri Nets and Concurrency , 2013, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

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

[21]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Process Discovery using Integer Linear Programming , 2009, Fundam. Informaticae.

[22]  Bart Baesens,et al.  Declarative process discovery with evolutionary computing , 2014, 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC).

[23]  Michael Westergaard,et al.  Mixing Paradigms for More Comprehensible Models , 2013, BPM.

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

[25]  Fabrizio Maria Maggi,et al.  Declare: A Tool Suite for Declarative Workflow Modeling and Enactment , 2011, BPM.

[26]  Maria E. Orlowska,et al.  Pockets of Flexibility in Workflow Specification , 2001, ER.

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

[28]  Evelina Lamma,et al.  Verifiable agent interaction in abductive logic programming: The SCIFF framework , 2008, TOCL.

[29]  Johannes De Smedt,et al.  Multi-paradigm Process Mining: Retrieving Better Models by Combining Rules and Sequences - (Short Paper) , 2014, OTM Conferences.

[30]  Bart Baesens,et al.  Uncovering the Relationship Between Event Log Characteristics and Process Discovery Techniques , 2013, Business Process Management Workshops.

[31]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  A Knowledge-Based Integrated Approach for Discovering and Repairing Declare Maps , 2013, CAiSE.

[32]  Massimo Mecella,et al.  A two-step fast algorithm for the automated discovery of declarative workflows , 2013, 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM).

[33]  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..

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

[35]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst What makes a good process model? , 2012, Software & Systems Modeling.

[36]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  DecSerFlow: Towards a Truly Declarative Service Flow Language , 2006, WS-FM.

[37]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Worklets: A Service-Oriented Implementation of Dynamic Flexibility in Workflows , 2006, OTM Conferences.

[38]  San-Yih Hwang,et al.  On the discovery of process models from their instances , 2002, Decis. Support Syst..

[39]  Bart Baesens,et al.  A comprehensive benchmarking framework (CoBeFra) for conformance analysis between procedural process models and event logs in ProM , 2013, 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM).

[40]  Bart Baesens,et al.  Robust Process Discovery with Artificial Negative Events , 2009, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[41]  Denis Poitrenaud,et al.  SPOT: an extensible model checking library using transition-based generalized Bu/spl uml/chi automata , 2004, The IEEE Computer Society's 12th Annual International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunications Systems, 2004. (MASCOTS 2004). Proceedings..

[42]  Michael Westergaard,et al.  CPN Tools 4: Multi-formalism and Extensibility , 2013, Petri Nets.

[43]  Boudewijn F. van Dongen,et al.  Causal Nets: A Modeling Language Tailored towards Process Discovery , 2011, CONCUR.

[44]  Manfred Reichert,et al.  Making Sense of Declarative Process Models: Common Strategies and Typical Pitfalls , 2013, BMMDS/EMMSAD.