Abstract
The identification of best practices is an important methodology to improve the executions of processes. To determine those best practices process mining techniques analyze process entities and model specific views to highlight points for improvements. A major requirement in most approaches is a common activity space so events can be related directly. However there are instances which do provide multiple activity universes and processes from different sources need to be compared. For example in corporate finance, strategic operations like mergers or acquisitions cause processes with similar workflow but different descriptions to be merged. In this work we develop LIProMa, a method to compare processes based on their temporal flow of action sequences by solving the correlated transportation problem. Activity labels are purposely omitted in the comparison. Hence our novel method provides a similarity measure which is capable of comparing processes with diverging labels often caused by distributed executions and varying operators. Therefore it works orthogonal to conventional methods which rely on similarity between activity labels. Instead LIProMa establishes a correspondence between activities of two processes by focusing on temporal patterns.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
van der Aa, H., Gal, A., Leopold, H., Reijers, H.A., Sagi, T., Shraga, R.: Instance-based process matching using event-log information. In: Dubois, E., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10253, pp. 283–297. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59536-8_18
Van der Aalst, W.: Data science in action. Process Mining, pp. 3–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49851-4_1
van Beest, N.R.T.P., Dumas, M., García-Bañuelos, L., La Rosa, M.: Log delta analysis: interpretable differencing of business process event logs. In: Motahari-Nezhad, H.R., Recker, J., Weidlich, M. (eds.) BPM 2015. LNCS, vol. 9253, pp. 386–405. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23063-4_26
Bolt, A., de Leoni, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A visual approach to spot statistically-significant differences in event logs based on process metrics. In: Nurcan, S., Soffer, P., Bajec, M., Eder, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9694, pp. 151–166. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39696-5_10
Buijs, J.C.A.M., Reijers, H.A.: Comparing business process variants using models and event logs. In: Bider, I., et al. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2014. LNBIP, vol. 175, pp. 154–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43745-2_11
Cordes, C., Vogelgesang, T., Appelrath, H.-J.: A generic approach for calculating and visualizing differences between process models in multidimensional process mining. In: Fournier, F., Mendling, J. (eds.) BPM 2014. LNBIP, vol. 202, pp. 383–394. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15895-2_32
Dijkman, R., Dumas, M., Van Dongen, B., Käärik, R., Mendling, J.: Similarity of business process models: metrics and evaluation. Inf. Syst. 36, 498–516 (2011)
Klinkmüller, C., Leopold, H., Weber, I., Mendling, J., Ludwig, A.: Listen to me: improving process model matching through user feedback. In: Sadiq, S., Soffer, P., Völzer, H. (eds.) BPM 2014. LNCS, vol. 8659, pp. 84–100. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10172-9_6
Pele, O., Werman, M.: Fast and robust earth mover’s distances. In: 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 460–467. IEEE, September 2009
Rubner, Y., Tomasi, C., Guibas, L.J.: The earth mover’s distance as a metric for image retrieval. Int. J. Comput. Vis. 40(2), 99–121 (2000)
Syamsiyah, A., et al.: Business process comparison: a methodology and case study. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2017. LNBIP, vol. 288, pp. 253–267. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59336-4_18
Van Dongen, B.F. (Boudewijn): BPI challenge 2015 (2015). https://doi.org/10.4121/UUID:31A308EF-C844-48DA-948C-305D167A0EC1. https://data.4tu.nl/repository/uuid:31a308ef-c844-48da-948c-305d167a0ec1
Van Dongen, B.F. (Boudewijn): BPI challenge 2017 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4121/UUID:5F3067DF-F10B-45DA-B98B-86AE4C7A310B. https://data.4tu.nl/repository/uuid:5f3067df-f10b-45da-b98b-86ae4c7a310b
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Richter, F., Zellner, L., Azaiz, I., Winkel, D., Seidl, T. (2019). LIProMa: Label-Independent Process Matching. In: Di Francescomarino, C., Dijkman, R., Zdun, U. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2019. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 362. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37453-2_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37453-2_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37452-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37453-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)