Advertisement

Enabling Reuse of Process Models through the Detection of Similar Process Parts

  • Fabian Pittke
  • Henrik Leopold
  • Jan Mendling
  • Gerrit Tamm
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 132)

Abstract

Many companies use business process modeling to support various improvements initiatives leading to an increasing number of process models. Typically, these models are stored in a collection containing several hundreds of process models. In many cases, process models are overlapping, although parts could be easily reused saving costs and efforts. Different labeling styles and evolving process models complicate the detection of reusable model parts. In this paper, we propose a novel approach for the detection of equivalent and similar process model parts that exploits semantic comparison of activity labels and behavioral comparison of control flow. We evaluate our approach on the SAP Reference Model, a collection with 604 process models. The evaluation reveals insights for the thresholds of semantic and behavioral similarity of process models as well as their influence for similar process part detection. Hence, we identify five candidate groups with specific similarity properties that contain reoccurring process parts.

Keywords

Business Process Modeling Similar Process Part Detection Semantic Similarity Behavioral Similarity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rosemann, M.: Potential Pitfalls of Process Modeling: Part A. Business Process Management Journal 12(2), 249–254 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reijers, H.A., Mans, R.S., van der Toorn, R.A.: Improved model management with aggregated business process models. Data Knowledge Engineering 68(2), 221–243 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Uba, R., Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L., La Rosa, M.: Clone Detection in Repositories of Business Process Models. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Toumani, F., Wolf, K. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6896, pp. 248–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leopold, H., Smirnov, S., Mendling, J.: On the refactoring of activity labels in business process models. Information Systems 37(5), 443–459 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dijkman, R.M., Dumas, M., van Dongen, B.F., Käärik, R., Mendling, J.: Similarity of Business Process Models: Metrics and Evaluation. Information Systems 36(2), 498–516 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grigori, D., Corrales, J., Bouzeghoub, M., Gater, A.: Ranking BPEL Processes for Service Discovery. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing 3(3), 178–192 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zha, H., Wang, J., Wen, L., Wang, C., Sun, J.: A workflow net similarity measure based on transition adjacency relations. Computers in Industry 61(5), 463–471 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kunze, M., Weidlich, M., Weske, M.: Behavioral Similarity – A Proper Metric. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Toumani, F., Wolf, K. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNCS, vol. 6896, pp. 166–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Recker, J.: Activity Labeling in Process Modeling: Empirical Insights and Recommendations. Information Systems 35(4), 467–482 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a Lexical Database for English. Communications of the ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lin, D.: An information-theoretic definition of similarity. In: Proc. 15th International Conf. on Machine Learning, pp. 296–304. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weidlich, M., Mendling, J., Weske, M.: Efficient consistency measurement based on behavioural profiles of process models. IEEE TSE 37(3), 410–429 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Keller, G., Teufel, T.: SAP(R) R/3 Process Oriented Implementation: Iterative Process Prototyping. Addison-Wesley (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bellon, S., Koschke, R., Antoniol, G., Krinke, J., Merlo, E.: Comparison and evaluation of clone detection tools. IEEE TSE 33(9), 577–591 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jacobson, I., Griss, M., Jonsson, P.: Software Reuse: Architecture, Process and Organization for Business Success, vol. 43. ACM Press (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heineman, G.T., Councill, W.T.: Component-Based Software Engineering: Putting the Pieces Together. Addison-Wesley Professional (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Erl, T.: Service-Oriented Architecture: Concepts, Technology, and Design. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marks, E.A., Bell, M.: Service-Oriented Architecture: A Planning and Implementation Guide for Business and Techonology. John Willey & Sons Inc. (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Madhusudan, T., Zhao, J., Marshall, B.: A case-based reasoning framework for workflow model management. Data and Knowledge Engineering 50(1), 87–115 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ehrig, M., Koschmider, A., Oberweis, A.: Measuring Similarity between Semantic Business Process Models. In: APCCM 2007, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia, vol. 67, pp. 71–80. Australian Computer Science Communications (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weidlich, M., Dijkman, R., Mendling, J.: The ICoP Framework: Identification of Correspondences between Process Models. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) CAiSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 483–498. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    La Rosa, M., Dumas, M., Uba, R., Dijkman, R.: Merging Business Process Models. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T.S., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6426, pp. 96–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fahland, D., Favre, C., Jobstmann, B., Koehler, J., Lohmann, N., Völzer, H., Wolf, K.: Instantaneous Soundness Checking of Industrial Business Process Models. In: Dayal, U., Eder, J., Koehler, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) BPM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5701, pp. 278–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leopold, H., Mendling, J.: Automatic Derivation of Service Candidates from Business Process Model Repositories. In: Abramowicz, W., Kriksciuniene, D., Sakalauskas, V. (eds.) BIS 2012. LNBIP, vol. 117, pp. 84–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabian Pittke
    • 1
    • 3
  • Henrik Leopold
    • 1
  • Jan Mendling
    • 2
  • Gerrit Tamm
    • 3
  1. 1.Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.WU ViennaViennaAustria
  3. 3.SRH University BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations