Skip to main content

Does This Make Sense? Machine Learning-Based Detection of Semantic Anomalies in Business Processes

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Business Process Management (BPM 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14159))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1095 Accesses

Abstract

The detection of undesired behavior is a key task in process mining, supported by techniques for conformance checking and anomaly detection. A downside of conformance checking, though, is that it requires a process model as a basis, limiting its applicability, whereas existing anomaly detection techniques look for statistically infrequent behavior, even though infrequency does not necessarily imply undesirability. The recently introduced concept of semantic anomaly detection overcomes these issues by detecting behavior that stands out from a semantic point of view, such as a claim being paid after it has been rejected. In this manner, it detects behavior that is undesirable, while its grounding in natural language analysis allows it to consider behavioral regularities extracted from other processes, alleviating the need to have a process model available. However, the state-of-the-art approach for semantic anomaly detection, a rigid, rule-based approach, is limited in its scope and accuracy. Therefore, we propose a machine learning-based alternative, which uses a classifier trained to recognize whether observed process behavior is normal or anomalous. Our experiments show that this learning-based approach greatly outperforms the state of the art. Users can directly apply our approach to detect semantic anomalies in their own event data by using one of our pre-trained classifiers, even if their data contains so far unseen process behavior.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that rework considerations would also apply to directly-follows relations, e.g., in \(\langle .. \), check, reject, check, accept \(\rangle \) we observe that check [request] (directly) follows reject [request], rather than vice versa, yet that this is allowed due to rework being conducted.

  2. 2.

    For clarity, we use \(\prec ^{+}\) and \(\prec ^{-}\) to denote positive and negative training samples, respectively.

  3. 3.

    https://gitlab.uni-mannheim.de/processanalytics/ml-semantic-anomaly-dection.

  4. 4.

    We provide detailed results of the hyper-parameter optimization in our repository.

  5. 5.

    Note that such false positives would be avoided when using an object-centric event log, since there would be no relation between the events related to pre-payments and declarations.

References

  1. van der Aa, H., Rebmann, A., Leopold, H.: Natural language-based detection of semantic execution anomalies in event logs. Inf. Syst. 102, 101824 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining: Data Science in Action, vol. 2. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49851-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Carmona, J., van Dongen, B., Solti, A., Weidlich, M.: Conformance Checking. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99414-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Chauhan, V.K., Dahiya, K., Sharma, A.: Problem formulations and solvers in linear SVM: a review. Artif. Intell. Rev. 52(2), 803–855 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chklovski, T., Pantel, P.: VerbOcean: mining the web for fine-grained semantic verb relations. In: EMNLP, pp. 33–40 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Devlin, J., Chang, M.W., Lee, K., Toutanova, K.: BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In: NAACL, pp. 4171–4186. ACL, Minneapolis, Minnesota (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Di Francescomarino, C., Ghidini, C.: Predictive process monitoring. In: W.M.P., Carmona, J. (eds.) Process Mining Handbook. vol. 448. LNBIP, pp. 320–346. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08848-3_10

  8. Dixit, P.M., et al.: Detection and interactive repair of event ordering imperfection in process logs. In: Krogstie, J., Reijers, H.A. (eds.) CAiSE 2018. LNCS, vol. 10816, pp. 274–290. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91563-0_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. van Dongen, B.: BPI challenge 2020 (2020). https://doi.org/10.4121/UUID:52FB97D4-4588-43C9-9D04-3604D4613B51

  10. Fahrenkrog-Petersen, S.A., Kabierski, M., van der Aa, H., Weidlich, M.: Semantics-aware mechanisms for control-flow anonymization in process mining. Inf. Syst 114, 102169 (2023)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Havasi, C., Speer, R., Alonso, J.: ConceptNet 3: a flexible, multilingual semantic network for common sense knowledge. In: RANLP. pp. 27–29. John Benjamins Philadelphia, PA (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Krajsic, P., Franczyk, B.: Semi-supervised anomaly detection in business process event data using self-attention based classification. Proc. Comput. Sci. 192, 39–48 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Krajsic, P., Franczyk, B.: Variational autoencoder for anomaly detection in event data in online process mining. In: ICEIS (1), pp. 567–574 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Leemans, S.J.J., Fahland, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Discovering block-structured process models from event logs - a constructive approach. In: Colom, J.-M., Desel, J. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2013. LNCS, vol. 7927, pp. 311–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38697-8_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Losing, V., Fischer, L., Deigmoeller, J.: Extraction of common-sense relations from procedural task instructions using BERT. In: 11th Global Wordnet Conference, pp. 81–90 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mannhardt, F., de Leoni, M., Reijers, H.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Data-driven process discovery - revealing conditional infrequent behavior from event logs. In: Dubois, E., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10253, pp. 545–560. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59536-8_34

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a lexical database for English. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nolle, T., Luettgen, S., Seeliger, A., Mühlhäuser, M.: BiNet: multi-perspective business process anomaly classification. Inf. Syst. 103, 101458 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nolle, T., Luettgen, S., Seeliger, A., Mühlhäuser, M.: Analyzing business process anomalies using autoencoders. Mach. Learn. 107(11), 1875–1893 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Omeliyanenko, J., Zehe, A., Hettinger, L., Hotho, A.: LM4KG: improving common sense knowledge graphs with language models. In: Pan, J.Z., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2020. LNCS, vol. 12506, pp. 456–473. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62419-4_26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Pennington, J., Socher, R., Manning, C.: GloVe: Global vectors for word representation. In: EMNLP, pp. 1532–1543. ACL, Doha, Qatar (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rebmann, A., van der Aa, H.: Enabling semantics-aware process mining through the automatic annotation of event logs. Inf. Syst. 110, 102111 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tandon, N., Dalvi, B., Grus, J., Yih, W.t., Bosselut, A., Clark, P.: Reasoning about actions and state changes by injecting commonsense knowledge. In: EMNLP, pp. 57–66 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vaswani, A., et al.: Attention is all you need. In: NeurIPS, vol. 30 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Weske, M., Decker, G., Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Model Collection of the Business Process Management Academic Initiative (2020)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Han van der Aa .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 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

Caspary, J., Rebmann, A., van der Aa, H. (2023). Does This Make Sense? Machine Learning-Based Detection of Semantic Anomalies in Business Processes. In: Di Francescomarino, C., Burattin, A., Janiesch, C., Sadiq, S. (eds) Business Process Management. BPM 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14159. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41620-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41620-0_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41619-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-41620-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics