Encyclopedia of Big Data Technologies

2019 Edition
| Editors: Sherif Sakr, Albert Y. Zomaya

Decomposed Process Discovery and Conformance Checking

  • Josep CarmonaEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77525-8_95


Decomposed process discovery and decomposed conformance checking are the corresponding variants of the two monolithic fundamental problems in process mining (van der Aalst 2011): automated process discovery, which considers the problem of discovering a process model from an event log (Leemans 2009), and conformance checking, which addresses the problem of analyzing the adequacy of a process model with respect to observed behavior (Munoz-Gama 2009), respectively.

The term decomposed in the two definitions is mainly describing the way the two problems are tackled operationally, to face their computational complexity by splitting the initial problem into smaller problems, that can be solved individually and often more efficiently.


The input for process discovery is an event log (Mendling and Dumas 2009), from which a process model (typically a Petri net Murata 1989) needs to be produced. The input for conformance checking is an event log and a process model (again,...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Adriansyah A (2014) Aligning observed and modeled behavior. PhD thesis, Technische Universiteit EindhovenGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold A (1994) Finite transition systems. Prentice Hall, ParisGoogle Scholar
  3. Bose RPJC, van der Aalst WMP (2009a) Abstractions in process mining: a taxonomy of patterns. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference business process management, BPM 2009, Ulm, 8–10 Sept 2009, pp 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03848-8_12Google Scholar
  4. Bose RPJC, van der Aalst WMP (2009b) Context aware trace clustering: towards improving process mining results. In: Proceedings of the SIAM international conference on data mining, SDM 2009, 30 Apr–May 2 2009, Sparks, pp 401–412Google Scholar
  5. Bose RPJC, van der Aalst WMP (2009c) Trace clustering based on conserved patterns: towards achieving better process models. In: BPM 2009 international workshops business process management workshops, Ulm, 7 Sept 2009. Revised papers, pp 170–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carmona J (2012) Projection approaches to process mining using region-based techniques. Data Min Knowl Discov 24(1):218–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10618-011-0226-xMathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carmona J, de Leoni M, Depaire B, Jouck T (2016) Summary of the process discovery contest 2016. In: Proceedings of the BPM 2016 workshops. LNBIP, vol 281, pp 7–10Google Scholar
  8. de Leoni M, Munoz-Gama J, Carmona J, van der Aalst WMP (2014) Decomposing alignment-based conformance checking of data-aware process models. In: Proceedings on the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2014 conferences – confederated international conferences: CoopIS, and ODBASE 2014, Amantea, 27–31 Oct 2014, pp 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45563-0_1Google Scholar
  9. de San Pedro J, Cortadella J (2016) Mining structured Petri nets for the visualization of process behavior. In: Proceedings of the 31st annual ACM symposium on applied computing, Pisa, 4–8 Apr 2016, pp 839–846. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2851613.2851645
  10. Ferreira DR, Zacarias M, Malheiros M, Ferreira P (2007) Approaching process mining with sequence clustering: experiments and findings. In: Proceedings of the business process management, 5th international conference, BPM 2007, Brisbane, 24–28 Sept 2007, pp 360–374Google Scholar
  11. Greco G, Guzzo A, Pontieri L, Saccà D (2006) Discovering expressive process models by clustering log traces. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 18(8):1010–1027.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2006.123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hompes B, Buijs J, van der Aalst W, Dixit P, Buurman H (2015) Discovering deviating cases and process variants using trace clustering. In: Proceedings of the 27th benelux conference on artificial intelligence (BNAIC)Google Scholar
  13. Leemans S (2009) Automated process discovery. In: Sakr and Zomaya (2017), pp 288–289Google Scholar
  14. Mans R, van der Aalst WMP, Vanwersch RJB (2015) Process mining in healthcare – evaluating and exploiting operational healthcare processes. Springer briefs in business process management. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16071-9Google Scholar
  15. Mendling J, Dumas M (2009) Business process event logs and visualization. In: Sakr and Zomaya (2017), pp 288–289Google Scholar
  16. Munoz-Gama J (2009) Conformance checking. In: Sakr and Zomaya (2017), pp 288–289Google Scholar
  17. Munoz-Gama J, Carmona J, van der Aalst WMP (2014) Single-entry single-exit decomposed conformance checking. Inf Syst 46:102–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2014.04.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Murata T (1989) Petri nets: properties, analysis and applications. Proc IEEE 77(4):541–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sakr S, Zomaya A (eds) (2017) Encyclopedia of big data technologies. Springer, Berlin-HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  20. Solé M, Carmona J (2012) A high-level strategy for c-net discovery. In: 12th international conference on application of concurrency to system design, ACSD 2012, Hamburg, 27–29 June 2012, pp 102–111Google Scholar
  21. van der Aalst WMP (2011) Process mining – discovery, conformance and enhancement of business processes. Springer, Berlin-HeidelbergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. van der Aalst WMP (2012) Decomposing process mining problems using passages. In: Application and theory of petri nets – 33rd international conference, PETRI NETS 2012, Hamburg, 25–29 June 2012. Proceedings, pp 72–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31131-4_5Google Scholar
  23. van der Aalst WMP (2013) Decomposing petri nets for process mining: a generic approach. Distrib Parallel Databases 31(4):471–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-013-7127-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. van der Aalst WMP, Verbeek HMW (2014) Process discovery and conformance checking using passages. Fundam Inform 131(1):103–138MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. van der Aalst WMP, Rubin VA, Verbeek HMW, van Dongen BF, Kindler E, Günther CW (2010) Process mining: a two-step approach to balance between underfitting and overfitting. Softw Syst Model 9(1):87–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-008-0106-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van der Aalst WMP, Adriansyah A, van Dongen BF (2011) Causal nets: a modeling language tailored towards process discovery. In: Proceedings of the CONCUR 2011 – concurrency theory – 22nd international conference, CONCUR 2011, Aachen, 6–9 Sept 2011, pp 28–42Google Scholar
  27. van der Aalst WMP, Kalenkova AA, Rubin VA, Verbeek E (2015) Process discovery using localized events. In: Proceedings of the application and theory of Petri Nets and concurrency – 36th international conference, PETRI NETS 2015, Brussels, 21–26 June 2015, pp 287–308Google Scholar
  28. vanden Broucke SKLM, Munoz-Gama J, Carmona J, Baesens B, Vanthienen J (2014) Event-based real-time decomposed conformance analysis. In: On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2014 conferences – confederated international conferences: CoopIS, and ODBASE 2014, Amantea, 27–31 Oct 2014, Proceedings, pp 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45563-0_20Google Scholar
  29. Verbeek HMW (2017) Decomposed replay using hiding and reduction as abstraction. Trans Petri Nets Other Models Concurr 12:166–186MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Verbeek HMW, van der Aalst WMP (2016) Merging alignments for decomposed replay. In: Proceedings of the application and theory of petri nets and concurrency – 37th international conference, PETRI NETS 2016, Toruń, 19–24 June 2016, pp 219–239Google Scholar
  31. Weerdt JD, vanden Broucke SKLM, Vanthienen J, Baesens B (2013) Active trace clustering for improved process discovery. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 25(12):2708–2720.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2013.64CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain