Domain-Driven Reduction Optimization of Recovered Business Processes
Process models play a key role in taking decisions when existing procedures and systems need to be changed and improved. However, these models are often not available or not aligned with the actual process implementation. In these cases, process model recovery techniques can be applied to analyze the existing system implementation and capture the underlying business process models. Several techniques have been proposed in the literature to recover business processes, although the resulting processes are often complex, intricate and thus difficult to understand for business analysts.
In this paper, we propose a process reduction technique based on multi-objective optimization, which minimizes at the same time process complexity, non-conformances, and loss of business content. This allows us to improve the process model understandability by decreasing its structural complexity, while preserving the completeness of the described business and domain-specific information. We conducted a case study based on a real-life e-commerce system. Results indicate that by balancing complexity, conformance and business content our technique produces understandable and meaningful reduced process models.
KeywordsBusiness Process Recovery Multi-Objective Optimization and Ontology
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.van der Aalst, W., Weijter, A., Maruster, L.: Workflow mining: Discovering process models from event logs. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 16, 2004 (2003)Google Scholar
- 3.Bose, R., van der Aalst, W.: Context aware trace clustering: Towards improving process mining results. In: Proc. of Symp. on Discrete Algorithms (SDM-SIAM), pp. 401–412 (2009)Google Scholar
- 4.Cardoso, J., Mendling, J., Neumann, G., Reijers, H.: A discourse on complexity of process models. In: Proc. of Workshop on Business Process Intelligence (BPI), pp. 115–126 (2006)Google Scholar
- 6.Di Francescomarino, C., Marchetto, A., Tonella, P.: Cluster-based modularization of processes recovered from web applications. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice (2010), doi: 10.1002/smr.518Google Scholar
- 8.Di Francescomarino, C., Tonella, P.: Supporting Ontology-Based Semantic Annotation of Business Processes with Automated Suggestions. In: Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Ukor, R. (eds.) BPMDS 2009 and EMMSAD 2009. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 211–223. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Thomas, O., Fellmann, M.: Semantic epc: Enhancing process modeling using ontology languages. In: SBPM. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 251. CEUR-WS.org (2007)Google Scholar
- 13.Tonella, P., Marchetto, A., Nguyen, C., Jia, Y., Lakhotia, K., Harman, M.: Finding the optimal balance between over and under approximation of models inferred from execution logs. In: Int. Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp. 21–30 (2012)Google Scholar
- 15.Veiga, G.M., Ferreira, D.R.: Understanding spaghetti models with sequence clustering for prom. In: Proc. of Workshop on Business Process Intelligence (BPI), Ulm, Germany (2009)Google Scholar