Advertisement

Conclusions

  • Giovanni MeroniEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 368)

Abstract

This book presented a novel technique, named artifact-driven process monitoring, to autonomously and continuously monitor the execution of business processes. This technique aimed at overcoming the limitation of traditional monitoring solutions, especially when dealing with human-centric and multi-party processes. In particular, with artifact-driven process monitoring, human operators are no longer required to send notifications to the monitoring platform whenever they start or conclude a business activity. Also, when a violation in the process execution occurs, human intervention is no longer required to continue monitoring the process.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ly, L.T., Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Rinderle-Ma, S., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Compliance monitoring in business processes: Functionalities, application, and tool-support. Information Systems 54, 209–234 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2015.02.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Santos, E.A.P., Francisco, R., Vieira, A.D., Loures, E.D.F.R., de Paula, M.A.B.: Modeling business rules for supervisory control of process-aware information systems. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) Business Process Management Workshops - BPM 2011 International Workshops, Clermont-Ferrand, France, August 29, 2011, Revised Selected Papers, Part II. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 100, pp. 447–458. Springer (2011). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28115-0_42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bragaglia, S., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Sottara, D.: Fuzzy conformance checking of observed behaviour with expectations. In: Pirrone, R., Sorbello, F. (eds.) AI*IA 2011: Artificial Intelligence Around Man and Beyond - XIIth International Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, Palermo, Italy, September 15–17, 2011. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6934, pp. 80–91. Springer (2011). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23954-0_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sebahi, S.: Monitoring business process compliance : a view based approach. (Monitoring de la conformité des processus métiers : approche à base de vues). Ph.D. thesis, Claude Bernard University Lyon 1, France (2012), https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00866483
  5. 5.
    Baresi, L., Guinea, S., Pasquale, L.: Self-healing BPEL processes with dynamo and the jboss rule engine. In: Wolf, A.L. (ed.) Proceedings of the 2007 International Workshop on Engineering of Software Services for Pervasive Environments, ESSPE 2007, Dubrovnik, Croatia, September 4, 2007. pp. 11–20. ACM (2007). doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1294904.1294906
  6. 6.
    Baresi, L., Guinea, S.: Dynamo: Dynamic monitoring of WS-BPEL processes. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Traverso, P. (eds.) Service-Oriented Computing - ICSOC 2005, Third International Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, December 12–15, 2005, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3826, pp. 478–483. Springer (2005). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/11596141_36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    López, M.T.G., Gasca, R.M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Explaining the incorrect temporal events during business process monitoring by means of compliance rules and model-based diagnosis. In: Bagheri, E., Gasevic, D., Hallé, S., Hatala, M., Nezhad, H.R.M., Reichert, M. (eds.) 17th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops, EDOC Workshops, Vancouver, BC, Canada, September 9–13, 2013. pp. 163–172. IEEE Computer Society (2013). doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2013.25
  8. 8.
    Giblin, C.J., Mueller, S., Pfitzmann, B.: From regulatory policies to event monitoring rules: towards model-driven compliance automation. Tech. rep, IBM (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Narendra, N.C., Varshney, V.K., Nagar, S., Vasa, M., Bhamidipaty, A.: Optimal control point selection for continuous business process compliance monitoring. In: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics. vol. 2, pp. 2536–2541 (Oct 2008). doi: 10.1109/SOLI.2008.4682963Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thullner, R., Rozsnyai, S., Schiefer, J., Obweger, H., Suntinger, M.: Proactive business process compliance monitoring with event-based systems. In: Workshops Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, EDOCW 2011, Helsinki, Finland, August 29 - September 2, 2011. pp. 429–437. IEEE Computer Society (2011). doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2011.22
  11. 11.
    Maggi, F.M., Montali, M., Westergaard, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Monitoring business constraints with linear temporal logic: An approach based on colored automata. In: Business Process Management - 9th International Conference, BPM 2011, Clermont-Ferrand, France, August 30 - September 2, 2011. Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6896, pp. 132–147. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23059-2_13Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maggi, F.M., Westergaard, M., Montali, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Runtime verification of ltl-based declarative process models. In: Runtime Verification - Second International Conference, RV 2011, San Francisco, CA, USA, September 27–30, 2011, Revised Selected Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7186, pp. 131–146. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29860-8_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Basin, D.A., Harvan, M., Klaedtke, F., Zalinescu, E.: MONPOLY: monitoring usage-control policies. In: Runtime Verification - Second International Conference, RV 2011, San Francisco, CA, USA, September 27–30, 2011, Revised Selected Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7186, pp. 360–364. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29860-8_27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hallé, S., Villemaire, R.: Runtime monitoring of message-based workflows with data. In: 12th International IEEE Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, ECOC 2008, 15–19 September 2008, Munich, Germany. pp. 63–72. IEEE Computer Society (2008). doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2008.32
  15. 15.
    Namiri, K., Stojanovic, N.: Pattern-based design and validation of business process compliance. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2007: CoopIS, DOA, ODBASE, GADA, and IS, OTM Confederated International Conferences CoopIS, DOA, ODBASE, GADA, and IS 2007, Vilamoura, Portugal, November 25–30, 2007, Proceedings, Part I. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4803, pp. 59–76. Springer (2007). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76848-7_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Montali, M., Maggi, F.M., Chesani, F., Mello, P., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Monitoring business constraints with the event calculus. ACM TIST 5(1), 17:1–17:30 (2013). doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2542182.2542199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Knuplesch, D., Dadam, P.: Monitoring business process compliance using compliance rule graphs. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T.S., Herrero, P., Kumar, A., Reichert, M., Qing, L., Ooi, B.C., Damiani, E., Schmidt, D.C., White, J., Hauswirth, M., Hitzler, P., Mohania, M.K. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2011 - Confederated International Conferences: CoopIS, DOA-SVI, and ODBASE 2011, Hersonissos, Crete, Greece, October 17–21, 2011, Proceedings, Part I. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7044, pp. 82–99. Springer (2011). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25109-2_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Janiesch, C., Koschmider, A., Mecella, M., Weber, B., Burattin, A., Ciccio, C.D., Gal, A., Kannengiesser, U., Mannhardt, F., Mendling, J., Oberweis, A., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S., Song, W., Su, J., Torres, V., Weidlich, M., Weske, M., Zhang, L.: The internet-of-things meets business process management: Mutual benefits and challenges (2017), paper available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.03628
  19. 19.
    Stertz, F., Mangler, J., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Nfc-based task enactment for automatic documentation of treatment processes. In: Reinhartz-Berger, I., Gulden, J., Nurcan, S., Guédria, W., Bera, P. (eds.) Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling - 18th International Conference, BPMDS 2017, 22nd International Conference, EMMSAD 2017, Held at CAiSE 2017, Essen, Germany, June 12–13, 2017, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 287, pp. 34–48. Springer (2017). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59466-8_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mandal, S., Hewelt, M., Weske, M.: A framework for integrating real-world events and business processes in an iot environment. In: Panetto, H., Debruyne, C., Gaaloul, W., Papazoglou, M.P., Paschke, A., Ardagna, C.A., Meersman, R. (eds.) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems. OTM 2017 Conferences - Confederated International Conferences: CoopIS, C&TC, and ODBASE 2017, Rhodes, Greece, October 23–27, 2017, Proceedings, Part I. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10573, pp. 194–212. Springer (2017). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69462-7_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Senderovich, A., Rogge-Solti, A., Gal, A., Mendling, J., Mandelbaum, A.: The ROAD from sensor data to process instances via interaction mining. In: Nurcan, S., Soffer, P., Bajec, M., Eder, J. (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering - 28th International Conference, CAiSE 2016, Ljubljana, Slovenia, June 13–17, 2016. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9694, pp. 257–273. Springer (2016). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39696-5_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wombacher, A.: How physical objects and business workflows can be correlated. In: Jacobsen, H., Wang, Y., Hung, P. (eds.) IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, SCC 2011, Washington, DC, USA, 4–9 July, 2011. pp. 226–233. IEEE Computer Society (2011). doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/SCC.2011.24
  23. 23.
    Weber, B., Pinggera, J., Neurauter, M., Zugal, S., Martini, M., Furtner, M., Sachse, P., Schnitzer, D.: Fixation patterns during process model creation: Initial steps toward neuro-adaptive process modeling environments. In: Bui, T.X., Jr., R.H.S. (eds.) 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2016, Koloa, HI, USA, January 5–8, 2016. pp. 600–609. IEEE Computer Society (2016). doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.81
  24. 24.
    Gnimpieba, Z.D.R., Nait-Sidi-Moh, A., Durand, D., Fortin, J.: Using internet of things technologies for a collaborative supply chain: Application to tracking of pallets and containers. In: The 10th International Conference on Future Networks and Communications (FNC 2015) / The 12th International Conference on Mobile Systems and Pervasive Computing (MobiSPC 2015) / Affiliated Workshops, August 17–20, 2015, Belfort, France. Procedia Computer Science, vol. 56, pp. 550–557. Elsevier (2015). doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Knoch, S., Ponpathirkoottam, S., Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Technology-enhanced process elicitation of worker activities in manufacturing (2017), to appear on Business Process Management Workshops - BPM 2017 International WorkshopsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Politecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations