Declarative and Hybrid Process Discovery: Recent Advances and Open Challenges
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Dumas M, Rosa ML, Mendling J, Reijers HA (2013) Fundamentals of business process management. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33143-5
van der Aalst WMP, van Hee KM (2002) Workflow management: models, methods, and systems. MIT Press, Cambridge
Weske M (2012) Business process management—concepts, languages, architectures, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28616-2
Davenport TH (1993) Process innovation: reengineering work through information technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Di Ciccio C, Marrella A, Russo A (2015) Knowledge-intensive processes: characteristics, requirements and analysis of contemporary approaches. J Data Semant 4(1):29–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13740-014-0038-4
Santos França JBd, Netto JM, do E S Carvalho J, Santoro FM, Baião FA, Pimentel M (2015) Kipo: the knowledge-intensive process ontology. Softw Syst Model 14(3):1127–1157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-014-0397-1
Lyng KM, Hildebrandt T, Mukkamala RR (2009) From paper based clinical practice guidelines to declarative workflow management. In: Ardagna D, Mecella M, Yang J (eds) Business process management workshops. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 336–347
Becker J, Rosemann M, von Uthmann C (2000) Guidelines of business process modeling, pp 30–49. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45594-9
Dijkman RM, Dumas M, Ouyang C (2008) Semantics and analysis of business process models in bpmn. Inf Softw Technol 50(12):1281–1294
van der Aalst WMP (1997) Verification of workflow nets. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on application and theory of petri nets, ICATPN ’97, pp 407–426. Springer-Verlag, London, UK, UK. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647744.733919
Awad A, Decker G, Weske M (2008) Efficient compliance checking using bpmn-q and temporal logic. In: Business process management (pp 326–341). Springer
Reijers HA, Slaats T, Stahl C (2013) Declarative modeling-an academic dream or the future for bpm? In: Daniel F, Wang J, Weber B (eds) Business process management. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 307–322
van der Aalst WMP, Stahl C (2011) Modeling business processes—a petri net-oriented approach. Cooperative Information Systems series. MIT Press. http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/modeling-business-processes
Hildebrandt TT, Mukkamala RR (2010) Declarative event-based workflow as distributed dynamic condition response graphs. In: Proceedings third workshop on programming language approaches to concurrency and communication-centric software, PLACES 2010, Paphos, Cyprus, 21st March 2010 (pp 59–73). https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.69.5
Pesic M, Schonenberg H, van der Aalst WMP (2007) DECLARE: full support for loosely-structured processes. In: 11th IEEE international enterprise distributed object computing conference (EDOC 2007), 15–19 October 2007, Annapolis, Maryland, USA (pp 287–300). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2007.25. http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/EDOC.2007.25
Debois S, Hildebrandt T, Slaats T, Marquard M (2014) A case for declarative process modelling: agile development of a grant application system. In: 2014 IEEE 18th international enterprise distributed object computing conference workshops and demonstrations (pp 126–133). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2014.27
Hildebrandt T, Mukkamala RR, Slaats T (2011) Designing a cross-organizational case management system using dynamic condition response graphs. In: 2011 IEEE 15th international enterprise distributed object computing conference (pp 161–170). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2011.35
Mukkamala RR (2012) A formal model for declarative workflows—dynamic condition response graphs. Ph.D. thesis, IT University of Copenhagen
Slaats T (2015) Flexible process notations for cross-organizational case management systems. Ph.D. thesis, IT University of Copenhagen
Marquard M, Shahzad M, Slaats T (2015) Web-based modelling and collaborative simulation of declarative processes. In: Motahari-Nezhad HR, Recker J, Weidlich M (eds) Business process management. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 209–225
van der Aalst W, Adams M, ter Hofstede A, Pesic M, Schonenberg H (2009) Flexibility as a service. In: Chen L, Liu C, Liu Q, Deng K (eds) Database systems for advanced applications, vol 5667. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, pp 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04205-8_27
Sadiq S, Sadiq W, Orlowska M (2001) Pockets of flexibility in workflow specification. In: Kunii HS, Jajodia S, Sølvberg A (eds) Conceptual modeling—ER 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2224. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 513–526
Bruno G (2014) Combining flexibility and data handling in business process models. Int J Hum Cap Inf Technol Prof (IJHCITP) 5(2):14–27
De Giacomo G, Dumas M, Maggi FM, Montali M (2015) Declarative process modeling in bpmn. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE)
De Smedt J, Vanden Broucke SK, De Weerdt J, Vanthienen J (2015) A full r/i-net construct lexicon for declare constraints. Available at SSRN 2572869
Zeising M, Schonig S, Jablonski S (2014) Towards a common platform for the support of routine and agile business processes. In: 2014 International conference on collaborative computing: networking, applications and worksharing (CollaborateCom) (pp 94–103). IEEE
Slaats T, Schunselaar DMM, Maggi FM, Reijers HA (2016) The semantics of hybrid process models. In: Debruyne C, Panetto H, Meersman R, Dillon T, Kühn e, O’Sullivan D, Ardagna CA (eds) On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2016 Conferences. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 531–551
Andaloussi AA, Burattin A, Slaats T, Kindler E, Weber B (2020) On the declarative paradigm in hybrid business process representations: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature study. Inf Syst 91:101505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2020.101505
Reijers HA, Slaats T, Stahl C (2013) Declarative modeling—an academic dream or the future for BPM? In: Proceedings of 11th international conference on business process management (BPM 2013) (pp 307–322)
Debois S, Hildebrandt T, Marquard M, Slaats T (2018) Hybrid process technologies in the financial sector: the case of BRFkredit. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 397–412
Van der Aalst W, Weijters T, Maruster L (2004) Workflow mining: discovering process models from event logs. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 16(9):1128–1142
Van Der Aalst W (2011) Process mining: discovery, conformance and enhancement of business processes. Springer, Berlin
Fahland D, Lübke D, Mendling J, Reijers H, Weber B, Weidlich M, Zugal S (2009) Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of understandability. In: Halpin T, Krogstie J, Nurcan S, Proper E, Schmidt R, Soffer P, Ukor R (eds) Enterprise, business-process and information systems modeling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 353–366
Ly LT, Rinderle-Ma S, Knuplesch D, Dadam P (2011) Monitoring business process compliance using compliance rule graphs. In: Meersman R, Dillon T, Herrero P, Kumar A, Reichert M, Qing L, Ooi BC, Damiani E, Schmidt DC, White J, Hauswirth M, Hitzler P, Mohania M (eds) On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2011. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 82–99
Goedertier S, Haesen R, Vanthienen J (2008) Rule-based business process modelling and enactment. Int J Bus Process Integration Manage 3(3):194–207
Pesic M (2008) Constraint-based workflow management systems: shifting control to users. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Industrial Engineering and Innovation Sciences. https://doi.org/10.6100/IR638413. Proefschrift
van der Aalst W, Pesic M, Schonenberg H, Westergaard M, Maggi FM (2010) Declare. Webpage. http://www.win.tue.nl/declare/
van der Aalst WM, Pesic M (2006) DecSerFlow: towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: Bravetti M, Nunez M, Zavattaro G (eds) Proceedings of web services and formal methods (WS-FM 2006), LNCS, vol 4184. Springer Verlag, pp 1–23
Dwyer MB, Avrunin GS, Corbett JC (1999) Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: Proceedings of the 1999 international conference on software engineering (IEEE Cat. No. 99CB37002) (pp 411–420). IEEE
Maggi FM, Montali M, Westergaard M, van der Aalst WMP (2011) Monitoring business constraints with linear temporal logic: an approach based on colored automata. In: Business process management (BPM), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6896, pp 32–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23059-13
Montali M, Pesic M, van der Aalst WM, Chesani F, Mello P, Storari S (2010) Declarative specification and verification of service choreographiess. ACM Trans Web (TWEB) 4(1):3
Montali M (2010) Specification and verification of declarative open interaction models: a logic-based approach. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 56. Springer
Westergaard M, Stahl C, Reijers HA (2013) Unconstrainedminer: efficient discovery of generalized declarative process models
Westergaard M, Maggi FM (2012) Looking into the future. In: Meersman R, Panetto H, Dillon T, Rinderle-Ma S, Dadam P, Zhou X, Pearson S, Ferscha A, Bergamaschi S, Cruz IF (eds) On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2012. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 250–267
De Masellis R, Maggi FM, Montali M (2014) Monitoring data-aware business constraints with finite state automata. In: Proceedings of the 2014 international conference on software and system process, ICSSP 2014 (pp 134–143). ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2600821.2600835
Burattin A, Maggi FM, Sperduti A (2016) Conformance checking based on multi-perspective declarative process models. Expert Syst Appl 65:194–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.08.040. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417416304390
Zugal S, Soffer P, Haisjackl C, Pinggera J, Reichert M, Weber B (2015) Investigating expressiveness and understandability of hierarchy in declarative business process models. Softw Syst Model 14(3):1081–1103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-013-0356-2
Zugal S, Soffer P, Pinggera J, Weber B (2012) Expressiveness and understandability considerations of hierarchy in declarative business process models. In: BMMDS/EMMSAD, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 113. Springer, pp 167–181
Mukkamala RR, Hildebrandt T, Tøth JB (2008) The resultmaker online consultant: from declarative workflow management in practice to ltl. In: Proceedings of the 2008 12th enterprise distributed object computing conference workshops, EDOCW ’08 (pp 135–142). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2008.57
Nielsen M, Plotkin G, Winskel G (1979) Petri nets, event structures and domains. In: G. Kahn (ed) Semantics of concurrent computation, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 70, pp 266–284. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0022474
Hildebrandt T, Mukkamala RR, Slaats T (2011) Nested dynamic condition response graphs. In: Proceedings of fundamentals of software engineering (FSEN). http://www.itu.dk/people/rao/pubs_accepted/fsenpaper.pdf
Hildebrandt T, Mukkamala RR, Slaats T, Zanitti F (2013) Contracts for cross-organizational workflows as timed dynamic condition response graphs. J Logic Algebraic Program (JLAP). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlap.2013.05.005
Slaats T, Mukkamala RR, Hildebrandt T, Marquard M (2013) Exformatics declarative case management workflows as dcr graphs. In: Daniel F, Wang J, Weber B (eds) Business process management. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 339–354
Costa Seco J, Debois S, Hildebrandt T, Slaats T (2018) Reseda: declaring live event-driven computations as reactive semi-structured data. In: 2018 IEEE 22nd International enterprise distributed object computing conference (EDOC) (pp 75–84). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2018.00020
Debois S, Hildebrandt T, Slaats T (2014) Hierarchical declarative modelling with refinement and sub-processes. In: Sadiq S, Soffer P, Völzer H (eds) Business process management. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 18–33
Hull R, Damaggio E, Fournier F, Gupta M, Heath III FT, Hobson S, Linehan M, Maradugu S, Nigam A, Sukaviriya P, Vaculin R (2011) Introducing the guard-stage-milestone approach for specifying business entity lifecycles. In: Proc. of WS-FM’10 (pp 1–24). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg
Bhattacharya K, Gerede C, Hull R, Liu R, Su J (2007) Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In: In preparation, pp 288–304
Object management group: case management model and notation, version 1.0. Webpage (2014). http://www.omg.org/spec/CMMN/1.0/PDF
Kurz M, Schmidt W, Fleischmann A, Lederer M (2015) Leveraging cmmn for acm: examining the applicability of a new omg standard for adaptive case management. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on subject-oriented business process management (p 4). ACM
Wiemuth M, Junger D, Leitritz M, Neumann J, Neumuth T, Burgert O (2017) Application fields for the new object management group (omg) standards case management model and notation (cmmn) and decision management notation (dmn) in the perioperative field. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 12(8):1439–1449
Herzberg N, Kirchner K, Weske M (2014) Modeling and monitoring variability in hospital treatments: a scenario using cmmn. In: International conference on business process management (pp 3–15). Springer
Schönig S, Zeising M (2015) The dpil framework: tool support for agile and resource-aware business processes. BPM (Demos) 1418:125–129
Fahland D, Lübke D, Mendling J, Reijers H, Weber B, Weidlich M, Zugal S (2009) Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of understandability, pp 353–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01862-6.29
Schönig S, Ackermann L, Jablonski S (2018) Towards an implementation of data and resource patterns in constraint-based process models. In: MODELSWARD, pp 271–278
Maggi FM, Mooij AJ, van der Aalst WMP (2011) User-guided discovery of declarative process models. In: 2011 IEEE symposium on computational intelligence and data mining (CIDM) (pp 192–199). https://doi.org/10.1109/CIDM.2011.5949297
Maggi FM, Bose RPJC, van der Aalst WMP (2012) Efficient discovery of understandable declarative process models from event logs. In: Advanced information systems engineering, pp 270–285
Agrawal R, Srikant R (1994) Fast algorithms for mining association rules in large databases. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on very large data bases, VLDB ’94 (pp 487–499). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=645920.672836
Maggi FM, Ciccio CD, Francescomarino CD, Kala T (2018) Parallel algorithms for the automated discovery of declarative process models. Inf Syst 74:136–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2017.12.002. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306437916306615. Special Issue on papers presented in the 20th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing1 Conference, EDOC 2016
Ciccio CD, Mecella M (2015) On the discovery of declarative control flows for artful processes. ACM Trans Manage Inf Syst 5(4):24:1–24:37. https://doi.org/10.1145/2629447
Di Ciccio C, Maggi FM, Mendling J (2016) Efficient discovery of target-branched declare constraints. Inf Syst 56(C):258–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2015.06.009
Ciccio CD, Maggi FM, Montali M, Mendling J (2017) Resolving inconsistencies and redundancies in declarative process models. Inf Syst 64:425–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2016.09.005. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306437915302052
Ciccio CD, Maggi FM, Montali M, Mendling J (2018) On the relevance of a business constraint to an event log. Inf Syst 78:144–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2018.01.011. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306437916306457
Debois S, Hildebrandt TT, Laursen PH, Ulrik KR (2017) Declarative process mining for dcr graphs. In: Proceedings of the symposium on applied computing, SAC ’17 (pp 759–764). ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3019612.3019622
Nekrasaite V, Parli AT, Back CO, Slaats T (2019) Discovering responsibilities with dynamic condition response graphs. In: Accepted for proceedings of 31st international conference on advanced information systems engineering (CAiSE 2019)
Popova V, Fahland D, Dumas M (2015) Artifact lifecycle discovery. Int J Cooperative Inf Syst 24(01):1550001. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021884301550001X
Schönig S, Cabanillas C, Jablonski S, Mendling J (2016) A framework for efficiently mining the organisational perspective of business processes. Decis Support Syst 89:87–97
Westergaard M, Slaats T (2013) Mixing paradigms for more comprehensible models. In: Daniel F, Wang J, Weber B (eds) Business process management. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 283–290
De Giacomo G, Dumas M, Maggi FM, Montali M (2015) Declarative process modeling in bpmn. In: Zdravkovic J, Kirikova M, Johannesson P (eds) Advanced information systems engineering. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 84–100
De Smedt J, De Weerdt J, Vanthienen J, Poels G (2016) Mixed-paradigm process modeling with intertwined state spaces. Bus Inf Syst Eng 58(1):19–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-015-0416-y
Smedt JD, Weerdt JD, Vanthienen J (2015) Fusion miner: process discovery for mixed-paradigm models. Decis Support Syst 77:123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2015.06.002. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923615001165
Maggi FM, Slaats T, Reijers HA (2014) The automated discovery of hybrid processes. In: Sadiq S, Soffer P, Völzer H (eds) Business process management. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 392–399
Schunselaar DMM, Slaats T, Maggi FM, Reijers HA, van der Aalst WMP (2018) Mining hybrid business process models: a quest for better precision. In: Abramowicz W, Paschke A (eds) Business information systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 190–205
Leemans SJ, Fahland D, van der Aalst WM (2013) Discovering block-structured process models from event logs-a constructive approach. In: International conference on applications and theory of Petri nets and concurrency (pp 311–329). Springer
Weijters AJMM Medeiros AKAD Process mining with the heuristicsminer algorithm
Pichler P, Weber B, Zugal S, Pinggera J, Mendling J, Reijers HA (2012) Imperative versus declarative process modeling languages: an empirical investigation. In: Daniel F, Barkaoui K, Dustdar S (eds) Business process management workshops. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 383–394
Abbad Andaloussi A, Slaats T, Burattin A, Hildebrandt TT, Weber B (2019) Evaluating the understandability of hybrid process model representations using eye tracking: first insights. In: Daniel F, Sheng QZ, Motahari H (eds) Business process management workshops. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 475–481
Abbad Andaloussi A, Burattin A, Slaats T, Petersen ACM, Hildebrandt TT, Weber B (2019) Exploring the understandability of a hybrid process design artifact based on dcr graphs. In: Reinhartz-Berger I, Zdravkovic J, Gulden J, Schmidt R (eds) Enterprise, business-process and information systems modeling. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 69–84
Abbad Andaloussi A, Buch-Lorentsen J, López HA, Slaats T, Weber B (2019) Exploring the modeling of declarative processes using a hybrid approach. In: Laender AHF, Pernici B, Lim EP, de Oliveira JPM (eds) Concept Model. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 162–170
Zugal S, Pinggera J, Weber B (2011) The impact of testcases on the maintainability of declarative process models. In: Halpin T, Nurcan S, Krogstie J, Soffer P, Proper E, Schmidt R, Bider I (eds) Enterprise, business-process and information systems modeling. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 163–177
Slaats T, Debois S, Hildebrandt T (2018) Open to change: a theory for iterative test-driven modelling. In: Weske M, Montali M, Weber I, vom Brocke J (eds) Business process management. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 31–47
Buijs JCAM, van Dongen BF, van der Aalst WMP (2012) On the role of fitness, precision, generalization and simplicity in process discovery. In: Meersman R, Panetto H, Dillon T, Rinderle-Ma S, Dadam P, Zhou X, Pearson S, Ferscha A, Bergamaschi S, Cruz IF (eds) On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2012. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 305–322
Back CO, Debois S, Slaats T (2018) Towards an empirical evaluation of imperative and declarative process mining. In: International conference on conceptual modeling (pp 191–198). Springer
Tax N, Lu X, Sidorova N, Fahland D, van der Aalst WM (2018) The imprecisions of precision measures in process mining. Inf Process Lett 135:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2018.01.013. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020019018300280
Westergaard M, Slaats T (2013) Cpn tools 4: a process modeling tool combining declarative and imperative paradigms. In: BPM (Demos)
Khan SS, Madden MG (2009) A survey of recent trends in one class classification. In: Irish conference on artificial intelligence and cognitive science (pp 188–197). Springer
Tax DMJ (2002) One-class classification: concept learning in the absence of counter-examples
Goedertier S, Martens D, Vanthienen J, Baesens B (2009) Robust process discovery with artificial negative events. J Mach Learn Res 10:1305–1340. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1577069.1577113