Complexity-Aware Generation of Workflows by Process-Oriented Case-Based Reasoning

  • Gilbert Müller
  • Ralph Bergmann
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10505)


One of the biggest challenges in business process management is the creation of appropriate and efficient workflows. This asks for intelligent, knowledge-based systems that assist domain experts in this endeavor. In this paper we investigate workflow creation by applying Process-Oriented Case-Based Reasoning (POCBR). We introduce POCBR and describe how it can be applied to the experience-based generation of workflows by retrieval and adaptation of available best-practice workflow models. While existing approaches have already demonstrated their feasibility in principle, the generated workflows are not optimized with respect to complexity requirements. However, there is a high interest in workflows with a low complexity, e.g., to ensure the appropriate enactment as well as the understandability of the workflow. The main contribution of this paper is thus a novel approach to consider the workflow complexity during the workflow generation. Therefore, a complexity measure for workflows is proposed and integrated into the retrieval and adaptation process. An experimental evaluation with real cooking recipes clearly demonstrates the benefits of the described approach.


Case-based reasoning Process-Oriented Case-Based Reasoning Workflow complexity Workflow adaptation 



This work was funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG), project number BE 1373/3-3.


  1. 1.
    van der Aalst, W.M.: Business process management: a comprehensive survey. ISRN Softw. Eng. 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aamodt, A., Plaza, E.: Case-based reasoning: foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Commun. 7(1), 39–59 (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Badra, F., Bendaoud, R., Bentebibel, R., Champin, P., Cojan, J., Cordier, A., Desprès, S., Jean-Daubias, S., Lieber, J., Meilender, T., Mille, A., Nauer, E., Napoli, A., Toussaint, Y.: TAAABLE: text mining, ontology engineering, and hierarchical classification for textual case-based cooking. In: Schaaf, M. (ed.) ECCBR 2008, Workshop Proceedings, pp. 219–228 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bergmann, R., Freßmann, A., Maximini, K., Maximini, R., Sauer, T.: Case-based support for collaborative business. In: Roth-Berghofer, T.R., Göker, M.H., Güvenir, H.A. (eds.) ECCBR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4106, pp. 519–533. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11805816_38 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergmann, R., Gessinger, S., Görg, S., Müller, G.: The collaborative agile knowledge engine CAKE. In: Goggins, S.P., Jahnke, I., McDonald, D.W., Bjørn, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, FL, USA, 09–12 November 2014, pp. 281–284. ACM (2014).
  6. 6.
    Bergmann, R., Gil, Y.: Similarity assessment and efficient retrieval of semantic workfows. Inf. Syst. 40, 115–127 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cardoso, J.: About the data-flow complexity of web processes. In: 6th International Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support: Business Processes and Support Systems: Design for Flexibility, pp. 67–74 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cardoso, J.S.: Business process control-flow complexity: metric, evaluation, and validation. Int. J. Web Service Res. 5(2), 49–76 (2008).
  9. 9.
    Cardoso, J., Mendling, J., Neumann, G., Reijers, H.A.: A discourse on complexity of process models. In: Eder, J., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4103, pp. 117–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi: 10.1007/11837862_13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dufour-Lussier, V., Ber, F.L., Lieber, J., Nauer, E.: Automatic case acquisition from texts for process-oriented case-based reasoning. Inf. Syst. 40, 153–167 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Stary, C., Augl, M.: Agiles Prozessmanagement mittels Subjektorientierung. HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik 50(2), 64–76 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Görg, S., Bergmann, R.: Social workflows - vision and potential study. Inf. Syst. 50, 1–19 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heravizadeh, M., Mendling, J., Rosemann, M.: Dimensions of business processes quality (QoBP). In: Ardagna, D., Mecella, M., Yang, J. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNBIP, vol. 17, pp. 80–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-00328-8_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hung, P., Chiu, D.: Developing workflow-based information integration (WII) with exception support in a web services environment. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p. 10 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jansen-Vullers, M., Loosschilder, M., Kleingeld, P., Reijers, H.: Performance measures to evaluate the impact of best practices. In: Proceedings of Workshops and Doctoral Consortium of CAiSE 2007 (BPMDS workshop), vol. 1, pp. 359–368. Tapir Academic Press, Trondheim (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kolodner, J.: Case Based Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lassen, K.B., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Complexity metrics for workflow nets. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(3), 610–626 (2009).
  18. 18.
    Latva-Koivisto, A.M.: Finding a complexity measure for business process models. Helsinki University of Technology, Systems Analysis Laboratory (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laue, R., Gruhn, V.: Complexity metrics for business process models. In: BIS. LNI, vol. 85, pp. 1–12. GI (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leake, D.B., Wilson, D.C.: Combining CBR with interactive knowledge acquisition, manipulation and reuse. In: Althoff, K.-D., Bergmann, R., Branting, L.K. (eds.) ICCBR 1999. LNCS, vol. 1650, pp. 203–217. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). doi: 10.1007/3-540-48508-2_15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lohrmann, M., Reichert, M.: Understanding business process quality. In: Glykas, M. (ed.) Business Process Management - Theory and Applications. SCI, vol. 444, pp. 41–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-28409-0_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lopez Mantaras, R., McSherry, D., Bridge, D., Leake, D., Smyth, B., Craw, S., Faltings, B., Maher, M.L., Cox, M.T., Forbus, K., Keane, M., Aamodt, A., Watson, I.: Retrieval, reuse, revision and retention in case-based reasoning. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 20(03), 215–240 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mendling, J.: Metrics for Process Models: Empirical Foundations of Verification, Error Prediction, and Guidelines for Correctness. LNBIP, vol. 6. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(2), 127–136 (2010). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Minor, M., Montani, S., Recio-García, J.A.: Process-oriented case-based reasoning. Inf. Syst. 40, 103–105 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Montani, S., Leonardi, G.: Retrieval and clustering for supporting business process adjustment and analysis. Inf. Syst. 40, 128–141 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Müller, G., Bergmann, R.: Workflow streams: a means for compositional adaptation in process-oriented CBR. In: Lamontagne, L., Plaza, E. (eds.) ICCBR 2014. LNCS, vol. 8765, pp. 315–329. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11209-1_23 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Müller, G., Bergmann, R.: CookingCAKE: a framework for the adaptation of cooking recipes represented as workflows. In: Kendall-Morwick, J. (ed.) Workshop Proceedings from ICCBR 2015, Frankfurt, Germany, 28–30 September 2015. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1520, pp. 221–232. (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Müller, G., Bergmann, R.: Generalization of workflows in process-oriented case-based reasoning. In: Proceedings of FLAIRS 2015, pp. 391–396. AAAI Press, Hollywood (Florida) (2015)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Müller, G., Bergmann, R.: Learning and applying adaptation operators in process-oriented case-based reasoning. In: Hüllermeier, E., Minor, M. (eds.) ICCBR 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9343, pp. 259–274. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24586-7_18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Müller, G., Bergmann, R.: POQL: a new query language for process-oriented case-based reasoning. In: Bergmann, R., Görg, S., Müller, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the LWA 2015 Workshops: KDML, FGWM, IR, and FGDB, Trier, Germany, 7–9 October 2015. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1458, pp. 247–255. (2015)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Reichert, M., Weber, B.: Enabling Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems: Challenges, Methods, Technologies. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Recker, J.: Business process quality management. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management 1. IHIS, pp. 167–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-45100-3_8 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Richter, M.M., Weber, R.O.: Case-Based Reasoning - A Textbook. Springer, Berlin (2013)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sauer, T., Maximini, K.: Using workflow context for automated enactment state tracking. In: Minor, M. (ed.) Workshop Proceedings: ECCBR 2006, Workshop: Case-based Reasoning and Context Awareness, pp. 300–314. Universität Trier (2006)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Taylor, I.J., Deelman, E., Gannon, D.B.: Workflows for e-Science. Springer, London (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vanderfeesten, I., Cardoso, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A., Van der Aalst, W.: Quality metrics for business process models. BPM Workflow Handbook 144, 179–190 (2007)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., Aalst, W.M.P., Cardoso, J.: On a quest for good process models: the cross-connectivity metric. In: Bellahsène, Z., Léonard, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5074, pp. 480–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-69534-9_36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Workflow Management Coalition: Workflow management coalition glossary & terminology (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business Information Systems IIUniversity of TrierTrierGermany

Personalised recommendations