Abstract
In the domain of process discovery, there are four quality dimensions for evaluating process models of which simplicity is one. Simplicity is often measured using the size of a process model, the structuredness and the entropy. It is closely related to the process model understandability. Researchers from the domain of business process management (BPM) proposed several metrics for measuring the process model understandability. A part of these understandability metrics focus on the control-flow perspective, which is important for evaluating models from process discovery algorithms. It is remarkable that there are more of these metrics defined in the BPM literature compared to the number of proposed simplicity metrics. To research whether the understandability metrics capture more understandability dimensions than the simplicity metrics, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted on 18 understandability metrics. A sample of 4450 BPMN models, both manually modelled and artificially generated, is used. Four dimensions are discovered: token behaviour complexity, node IO complexity, path complexity and degree of connectedness. The conclusion of this analysis is that process analysts should be aware that the measurement of simplicity does not capture all dimensions of the understandability of process models.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Business process management: a comprehensive survey. ISRN Softw. Eng. 2013, 1–37 (2013)
van der Aalst, W., et al.: Business process mining: an industrial application. Inf. Syst. 32(5), 713–732 (2007)
Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: A study into the factors that influence the understandability of business process models. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern.-Part A: Syst. Hum. 41(3), 449–462 (2011)
van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining: Discovery Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19345-3
Lassen, K.B., van der Aalst, W.M.: Complexity metrics for workflow nets. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(3), 610–626 (2009)
Ihaka, R., Gentleman, R.: R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 5(3), 299–314 (1996)
Sarshar, K., Loos, P.: Comparing the control-flow of EPC and petri net from the end-user perspective. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 434–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11538394_36
Recker, J.C., Dreiling, A.: Does it matter which process modelling language we teach or use? An experimental study on understanding process modelling languages without formal education, Toowoomba (2007)
Laue, R., Gruhn, V.: Complexity metrics for business process models. In: Business Information Systems, Klagenfurt, Austria, January 2006
Petrusel, R., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: How visual cognition influences process model comprehension. Decis. Support Syst. 96(Suppl. C), 1–16 (2017)
Mendling, J.: Detection and prediction of errors in EPC business process models. PhD thesis, Wirtschaftsuniversitt Wien Vienna (2007)
Fernndez-Ropero, M., Prez-Castillo, R., Caballero, I., Piattini, M.: Quality-driven business process refactoring. In: International Conference on Business Information Systems (ICBIS 2012), pp. 960–966 (2012)
Mendling, J., Strembeck, M.: Influence factors of understanding business process models. In: Abramowicz, W., Fensel, D. (eds.) BIS 2008. LNBIP, vol. 7, pp. 142–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79396-0_13
Cardoso, J.: Control-flow complexity measurement of processes and Weyuker’s properties. In: 6th International Enformatika Conference. vol. 8, pp. 213–218 (2005)
Figl, K.: Comprehension of procedural visual business process models: a literature review. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 59(1), 41–67 (2017)
Polani, G., Cegnar, B.: Complexity metrics for process models a systematic literature review. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 51(Suppl. C), 104–117 (2017)
Gschwind, T., Koehler, J., Wong, J.: Applying patterns during business process modeling. In: Dumas, M., Reichert, M., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) BPM 2008. LNCS, vol. 5240, pp. 4–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85758-7_4
Pavlicek, J., Hronza, R., Pavlickova, P., Jelinkova, K.: The business process model quality metrics. In: Pergl, R., Lock, R., Babkin, E., Molhanec, M. (eds.) EOMAS 2017. LNBIP, vol. 298, pp. 134–148. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68185-6_10
Gruhn, V., Laue, R.: Reducing the cognitive complexity of business process models, pp. 339–345, June 2009
La Rosa, M., Wohed, P., Mendling, J., Ter Hofstede, A.H., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.: Managing process model complexity via abstract syntax modifications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 7(4), 614–629 (2011)
Muketha, G.: Complexity metrics for measuring the understandability and maintainability of business process models using goal-question-metric (GQM). Int. J. Comput. Sci. Netw. Secur. 8(5), 219–225 (2008)
Vanderfeesten, I., Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J., van der 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). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69534-9_36
Kunze, M., Berger, P., Weske, M., Lohmann, N., Moser, S.: BPM academic initiative-fostering empirical research. In: BPM, pp. 1–5 Demos (2012)
Jouck, T., Depaire, B.: Generating artificial data for empirical analysis of control-flow discovery algorithms: a process tree and log generator. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 10, 18 (2018)
van der Aalst, W.: On the representational bias in process mining, pp. 2–7. IEEE, June 2011
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R.: Multivariate Data Analysis, Number Seventh edn. Pearson Education Limited, London (2013)
Child, D.: The Essentials of Factor Analysis. A&C Black, London (2006). Google-Books-ID: rQ2vdJgohH0C
Sim, K.A., Tan, T.S.: Wong, K.B.: On the shortest path in some k-connected graphs, p. 050010 (2016)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lieben, J., Jouck, T., Depaire, B., Jans, M. (2018). An Improved Way for Measuring Simplicity During Process Discovery. In: Pergl, R., Babkin, E., Lock, R., Malyzhenkov, P., Merunka, V. (eds) Enterprise and Organizational Modeling and Simulation. EOMAS 2018. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 332. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00787-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00787-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-00786-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-00787-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)