Skip to main content

Research Directions in Process Modeling and Mining Using Knowledge Graphs and Machine Learning

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13738))

Abstract

Services Computing has seen a dramatic rise in the last twenty years. The foundation for services provided by enterprises is business processes, so progress in the development of effective and efficient processes is of utmost importance. The design or modeling of business processes is a challenging task. Over the years many research and development efforts have paid dividends, including languages and notations like the Business Process Executing Language and the Business Process Modeling Notation, along with supporting methodologies and tools. Research in Semantic Web Services and Processes showed promise for the automation of services discovery and composition (orchestration/choreography). The current large-scale deployment of enterprise knowledge graphs by many organizations coupled with huge advancements in machine learning (particularly deep learning) provides new opportunities for advancing this automation forward.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.): Handbook on Business Process Management 1. IHIS, Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45100-3

  2. Aggarwal, R., Verma, K., Miller, J., Milnor, W.: Constraint driven web service composition in meteor-s. In: IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, 2004. (SCC 2004), Proceedings, pp. 23–30. IEEE (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aho, A.V., Corasick, M.J.: Efficient string matching: an aid to bibliographic search. Commun. ACM 18(6), 333–340 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Akkiraju, R., Farrell, J., Miller, J.A., Sheth, A.P., Verma, K.: Web service semantics-wsdl-s, Meenakshi Nagarajan (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Andrews, T., et al.: Business process execution language for web services, Doug Smith (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bachhofner, S., Kiesling, E., Revoredo, K., Waibel, P., Polleres, A.: Automated process knowledge graph construction from BPMN models. In: Strauss, C., Cuzzocrea, A., Kotsis, G., Tjoa, A.M., Khalil, I. (eds) Database and Expert Systems Applications. DEXA 2022. LNCS, vol. 13426. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12423-5_3

  7. Bordes, A., Usunier, N., Garcia-Duran, A., Weston, J., Yakhnenko, O.: Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cai, B., Xiang, Y., Gao, L., Zhang, H., Li, Y., Li, J.: Temporal knowledge graph completion: a survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.08236 (2022)

  9. Cheikhrouhou, S., Kallel, S., Guermouche, N., Jmaiel, M.: The temporal perspective in business process modeling: a survey and research challenges. SOCA 9(1), 75–85 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cinpoeru, M., Ghiran, A.-M., Harkai, A., Buchmann, R.A., Karagiannis, D.: Model-driven context configuration in business process management systems: an approach based on knowledge graphs. In: Pańkowska, M., Sandkuhl, K. (eds.) BIR 2019. LNBIP, vol. 365, pp. 189–203. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31143-8_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Cui, Y., et al.: METRO: a generic graph neural network framework for multivariate time series forecasting. Proc. VLDB Endowment 15(2), 224–236 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ding, Z., Ma, Y., He, B., Tresp, V.: A simple but powerful graph encoder for temporal knowledge graph completion. arXiv:2112.07791 (2021)

  13. Duong, C.T., Hoang, T.D., Yin, H., Weidlich, M., Nguyen, Q.V.H., Aberer, K: Efficient streaming subgraph isomorphism with graph neural networks. Proc. VLDB Endowment 14(5), 730–742 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fensel, D., et al.: Introduction: what is a knowledge graph? In: Knowledge Graphs, pp. 1–10. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37439-6_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Finkel, J.R., Grenager, T., Manning, C.D: Incorporating non-local information into information extraction systems by gibbs sampling. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL2005), pp. 363–370 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gagne, D., Trudel, A.: Time-BPMN. In: 2009 IEEE conference on commerce and enterprise computing, pp. 361–367. IEEE (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grolinger, K., Capretz, M.A.M., Cunha, A., Tazi, S.: Integration of business process modeling and web services: a survey. SOCA. 8(2), 105–128 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Han, Z., Wang, Y., Ma, Y., Günnemann, S., Tresp, V.: Graph Hawkes network for reasoning on temporal knowledge graphs. arXiv:2003.13432 (2020)

  19. Huai, W., Liu, X., Sun, X.: Towards trustworthy composite service through business process model verification. In: 2010 7th International Conference on Ubiquitous Intelligence Computing and 7th International Conference on Autonomic Trusted Computing, pp. 422–427. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jacobs, T., Yu, J., Gastinger, J., Sztyler, T.: Prock: machine learning for knowledge-intensive processes. arXiv:2109.04881 (2021)

  21. Karetnikov, A., Ehrlinger, L., Geist, V.: Enhancing transe to predict process behavior in temporal knowledge graphs. In: Database and Expert Systems Applications - DEXA 2022 Workshops. DEXA 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 1633. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14343-4_34

  22. Lin, Y., Liu, Z., Sun, M., Liu, Y., Zhu, X.: Learning entity and relation embeddings for knowledge graph completion. In: Twenty-ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lu, J., Ma, J., Zheng, X., Wang, G., Li, H., Kiritsis, D.: Design ontology supporting model-based systems engineering formalisms. IEEE Syst. J. 1–12 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lu, R., Sadiq, S.: A survey of comparative business process modeling approaches. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) BIS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4439, pp. 82–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72035-5_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Meidan, A., García-García, J.A., Escalona, M.J., Ramos, I.: A survey on business processes management suites. Comput. Stan. Interfaces 51, 71–86 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mendling, J., Nüttgens, M.: EPC markup language (EPML): an xml-based interchange format for event-driven process chains (EPC). ISEB 4(3), 245–263 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Morales, L.E.M.: Business process verification: the application of model checking and timed automata. CLEI Electron. J. 17(2), 3–3 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Minervini, P., d’Amato, C., Fanizzi, N., Esposito, F.: Efficient learning of entity and predicate embeddings for link prediction in knowledge graphs. URSW@ ISWC, 1479, 26–37 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Musen, M.A.: The protégé project: a look back and a look forward. AI Matters 1(4), 4–12 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Noy, N., Gao, Y., Jain, A., Narayanan, A., Patterson, A., Taylor, J.: Industry-scale knowledge graphs: lessons and challenges: five diverse technology companies show how it’s done. Queue 17(2), 48–75 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Oberhauser, R., Stigler, S.: Microflows: enabling agile business process modeling to orchestrate semantically-annotated microservices. In: Seventh International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design (BMSD 2017), vol. 1, pp. 19–28 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Serral, E., Stirna, J., Ralyté, J., Grabis, J. (eds.): PoEM 2021. LNBIP, vol. 432. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91279-6

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Simsek, U., Angele, K., Kärle, E., Opdenplatz, J., Sommer, D., Umbrich, J., Fensel, D.: Building and maintaining knowledge graphs, Knowledge graph lifecycle (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Skouradaki, M., Göerlach, K., Hahn, M., Leymann, F.: Application of sub-graph isomorphism to extract reoccurring structures from BPMN 2.0 process models. In: 2015 IEEE Symposium on Service-Oriented System Engineering, pp. 11–20. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sola, D., Meilicke, C., van der Aa, H., Stuckenschmidt, H.: On the use of knowledge graph completion methods for activity recommendation in business process modeling. In: Marrella, A., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2021. LNBIP, vol. 436, pp. 5–17. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94343-1_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  36. Song, D., et al.: Building and querying an enterprise knowledge graph. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 12(3), 356–369 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Steindl, G., Kastner, W.: Semantic microservice framework for digital twins. Appl. Sci. 11(12), 5633 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Trouillon, T., Welbl, J., Riedel, S., Gaussier, É., Bouchard, G.: Complex embeddings for simple link prediction. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 2071–2080. PMLR (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Uifălean, S., Ghiran, A.-M., Buchmann, R.A.: From BPMN models to labelled property graphs. in information systems development: artificial intelligence for information systems development and operations (ISD2022) (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ushio, A., Camacho-Collados, J.: T-NER: an all-round python library for transformer-based named entity recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.12616 (2022)

  41. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Yawl: yet another workflow language. Inf. syst. 30(4), 245–275 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Venugopal, I., Töllich, J., Fairbank, M., Scherp, A.: A comparison of deep-learning methods for analysing and predicting business processes. In: 2021 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), pp. 1–8. IEEE (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Wang, Q., Mao, Z., Wang, B., Guo, L.: Knowledge graph embedding: a survey of approaches and applications. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 29(12), 2724–2743 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Wang, Z., Zhang, J., Feng, J., Chen, Z.: Knowledge graph embedding by translating on hyperplanes. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 28 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wu, S., Fang, Z., Tang, J.: Accurate product name recognition from user generated content. In: 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops, pp. 874–877. IEEE (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Xu, D., Ruan, C., Korpeoglu, E., Kumar, S., Achan, K.: Product knowledge graph embedding for e-commerce. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, pp. 672–680 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Zarour, K., Benmerzoug, D., Guermouche, N., Drira, K.: A systematic literature review on BPMN extensions. Bus. Process Manage. J. 26(6), 1473–1503 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rezwan Mahmud .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix: COVID-19 as a Disease Process

Appendix: COVID-19 as a Disease Process

A process model may be created for the COVID-19 disease as follows starting with a graph that represents the main states and state transitions.

Fig. 3.
figure 3

State transition diagram for a \(\textrm{SEIHURD}\) model

The states are Susceptible (S), Exposed (E), Infected (I), Hospitalized (H), Intensive Care Unit (U), Recovered (R), and Died (D). From patient data timestamps may be attached to each state. From these, durations may be attached to edges, e.g., positive test \(\implies \) infected, and after say 6 d the patient is hospitalized, after 4 d, the patient is placed in the unit, etc. Similar time annotations may be used for aggregated data (at national and state levels) such as that provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Johns Hopkins University (JHU), or Our World in Data (OWID).

Analytics may be performed by maintaining population counts for each of the vertices and transition rates (alternatively expected transition times) between vertices/states. A variety of modeling techniques may be applied, including Continuous-Time Markov Chains, Compartmental models (a system of ordinary differential equations), Vector Auto-Regressive (VAR) models, Staged Seasonal, Auto-Regressive, Integrated, Moving Average, Exogenous (SARIMAX) models, and several types of Deep Learning models.

A type of deep learning model that is showing potential for capturing much of the dynamics of the disease process is Graph Neural Network (GNN) model. A GNN can be built from Multivariate Time-Series (MTS) where each of the \(n = 7\) variables forms a column in matrix Y. Given that these variables (and others) for COVID-19 have been recorded daily since January 2020, there are now about \(m = 1000\) rows of data, so \(Y \in \mathbb {R}^{m \times n}\). Each element in matrix Y, \(y_{tj}\) where t is time/day and j designates which variable, e.g., \(j = 2 \implies \textrm{I}\), forms a vertex in the GNN. Contemporaneous (at the same time) edges may be added based on the state-transition graph, they should be labeled as contemporaneous as these data/counts may not be available for forecasting. Structural learning should be performed to determine adjacency. Edges in the GNN can be added and removed by learning from data, for example, by associative or causal analysis between vertices using cross-correlation, Granger causality, or cross-mutual information. The most correlated or causal edges should be added (e.g., \(\textrm{H} \rightarrow \textrm{D}\) preliminary analysis shows strong lagged effects at 8 and 14 d). A generic GNN for MTS forecasting is given in [11]; see Fig. 1 for a depiction of what such a GNN would look like. Research into the modeling and analysis of such processes can cross fertilize research into business processes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Miller, J.A., Mahmud, R. (2022). Research Directions in Process Modeling and Mining Using Knowledge Graphs and Machine Learning. In: Qingyang, W., Zhang, LJ. (eds) Services Computing – SCC 2022. SCC 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13738. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23515-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23515-3_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-23514-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-23515-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics