Enhancing Workflow-Nets with Data for Trace Completion

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 308)


The growing adoption of IT-systems for modeling and executing (business) processes or services has thrust the scientific investigation towards techniques and tools which support more complex forms of process analysis. Many of them, such as conformance checking, process alignment, mining and enhancement, rely on complete observation of past (tracked and logged) executions. In many real cases, however, the lack of human or IT-support on all the steps of process execution, as well as information hiding and abstraction of model and data, result in incomplete log information of both data and activities. This paper tackles the issue of automatically repairing traces with missing information by notably considering not only activities but also data manipulated by them. Our technique recasts such a problem in a reachability problem and provides an encoding in an action language which allows to virtually use any state-of-the-art planning to return solutions.


Workflow Nets Reachability Problem Conformance Checking Valid Firing Variable Request 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research has been partially carried out within the Euregio IPN12 KAOS, which is funded by the “European Region Tyrol-South Tyrol-Trentino” (EGTC) under the first call for basic research projects.


  1. 1.
    Aalst, W.M.P.: Verification of workflow nets. In: Azéma, P., Balbo, G. (eds.) ICATPN 1997. LNCS, vol. 1248, pp. 407–426. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adriansyah, A., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.: Conformance checking using cost-based fitness analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 15th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2011), pp. 55–64. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bertoli, P., Di Francescomarino, C., Dragoni, M., Ghidini, C.: Reasoning-based techniques for dealing with incomplete business process execution traces. In: Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Boella, G., Micalizio, R. (eds.) AI*IA 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8249, pp. 469–480. Springer, Cham (2013). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Giacomo, G., Maggi, F.M., Marrella, A., Sardiña, S.: Computing trace alignment against declarative process models through planning. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, pp. 367–375. AAAI Press (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Masellis, R., Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Tessaris, S.: Enhancing workflow-nets with data for trace completion (2017).
  6. 6.
    Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C., Tessaris, S., Sandoval, I.V.: Completing workflow traces using action languages. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 314–330. Springer, Cham (2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eiter, T., Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Polleres, A.: A logic programming approach to knowledge-state planning, II: the DLVK system. Art. Intell. 144(1–2), 157–211 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Hee, K., Sidorova, N., Voorhoeve, M.: Soundness and separability of workflow nets in the stepwise refinement approach. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Best, E. (eds.) ICATPN 2003. LNCS, vol. 2679, pp. 337–356. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kiepuszewski, B., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Bussler, C.J.: On structured workflow modelling. In: Bubenko, J., Krogstie, J., Pastor, O., Pernici, B., Rolland, C., Sølvberg, A. (eds.) Seminal Contributions to Information Systems Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    de Leoni, M., van der Aalst, W.: Data-aware process mining: discovering decisions in processes using alignments. In: Proceedings of the 28th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2013), pp. 1454–1461. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Leoni, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Dongen, B.F.: Data- and resource-aware conformance checking of business processes. In: Abramowicz, W., Kriksciuniene, D., Sakalauskas, V. (eds.) BIS 2012. LNBIP, vol. 117, pp. 48–59. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lifschitz, V.: Action languages, answer sets and planning. In: Apt, K.R., Marek, V.W., Truszczynski, M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) The Logic Programming Paradigm: A 25-Year Perspective, pp. 357–373. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marrella, A., Russo, A., Mecella, M.: Planlets: automatically recovering dynamic processes in YAWL. In: Meersman, R., Panetto, H., Dillon, T., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P., Zhou, X., Pearson, S., Ferscha, A., Bergamaschi, S., Cruz, I.F. (eds.) OTM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7565, pp. 268–286. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rogge-Solti, A., Mans, R.S., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M.: Improving documentation by repairing event logs. In: Grabis, J., Kirikova, M., Zdravkovic, J., Stirna, J. (eds.) PoEM 2013. LNBIP, vol. 165, pp. 129–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sidorova, N., Stahl, C., Trčka, N.: Soundness verification for conceptual workflow nets with data. Inf. Syst. 36(7), 1026–1043 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van der Aalst, W., van Hee, K., ter Hofstede, A., Sidorova, N., Verbeek, H., Voorhoeve, M., Wynn, M.: Soundness of workflow nets: classification, decidability, and analysis. Formal Aspects of Comput. 23(3), 333–363 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FBK-IRSTBolzanoItaly
  2. 2.Free University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations