Skip to main content
Log in

Using metadata for recommending business process

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the increasing development of business process techniques in many enterprises and organizations, business process recommendation has become a dramatic research area of business process management techniques. However, there are some problems in current business process recommendation approaches, which rely on simple metrics such as structural, textual, or behavioral similarity, or which generally rely on specific structures without typical metadata features. To improve the availability of process description and recommendation, an approach for recommending processes is proposed based on metadata. The concept of business process description framework (BPDF) is first constructed based on MFI-5. According to BPDF, similarity feature set (SFS) of the process is defined. The processes are further identified and quantified using SFS, so that the process vectors are obtained. And the similarity measure algorithm is utilized to calculate the similarity between any two vectors, and the similarity matrix of the processes can then be extracted. According to the results of processes similarity measurement, these processes are ranked to provide support for process recommendation. An empirical experiment shows that the proposed approach can be effectively applied to actual scenarios of process recommendation.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yan Z, Dijkman R, Grefen P (2012) Fast business process similarity search. Distrib Parallel Databases 30(2):105–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu D, Huo C, Yao H (2018) Research of commodity recommendation workflow based on LSH algorithm. Multimedia Tools Appl 8:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ye Y, Yueshen X, Yin J et al (2016) Social business process management and process recommendation method. Comput Integrated Manuf Syst 22(2):413–421

    Google Scholar 

  4. Yu F, Guo L, Zhang L (2017) Process modeling leveraged by workflow fragments and logs analysis. J Chin Comput Syst 38(4):664–670

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cao B, Yin J, Deng S et al (2013) A near neighbour and maximal subgraph first based business process recommendation technique. Chin J Comput 36(2):263–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Montani S, Leonardi G, Quaglini S et al (2015) A knowledge-intensive approach to process similarity calculation. Expert Syst Appl 42(9):4207–4215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dijkman R, Dumas M, Van Dongen B et al (2011) Similarity of business process models: metrics and evaluation. Inf Syst 36(2):498–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhao Li, Zhao Y, Liang P et al (2015) MFI based interoperability measurement of business models in enterprises. Comput Sci 42(11):479–485

    Google Scholar 

  9. Geiger M, Harrera S, Lenhard J et al (2017) BPMN 2.0: the state of support and implementation. Future Gener Comput Syst 80(3):250–262

    Google Scholar 

  10. Becker M, Laue R (2012) A comparative survey of business process similarity measures. Comput Ind 63(2):148–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cao B, Wang J, Jing F et al (2017) Querying similar process models based on the Hungarian algorithm. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 10(1):121–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jie L, Lijie W, Jianmin W (2013) Process model storage mechanism based on petri net edit distance. Comput Integr Manuf Syst 19(8):1832–1841

    Google Scholar 

  13. Huang H, Peng R, Feng Z (2017) Efficient and exact query of large process model repositories in cloud workflow systems. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 2:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sun J, Tianlong G, Qian J (2017) A behavioral similarity metric for semantic workflows based on semantic task adjacency relations with importance. IEEE Access 5(99):15609–15618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kunze M, Weidlich M, Weske M (2015) Querying process models by behavior inclusion. Softw Syst Model 14(3):1105–1125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cortes-Comax M, Dupuy-Chessa S, Rieu D et al (2016) Evaluating the appropriateness of the BPMN 2.0 standard for modeling service choreographies: using an extended quality framework. Softw Syst Model 15(1):1–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zeng C, Zhang T, Hung Patrick CK (2016) Fast service process fragment indexing and ranking. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 9(5):672–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Huang Z, Huai J, Liu X et al (2012) Automatic service discovery based on business similarity. Journal of Software 23(3):489–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Appice A, Malerba D (2016) A co-training strategy for multiple view clustering in process mining. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 9(6):832–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Amiri MJ, Koupaee M (2018) Data-driven business process similarity. LET Softw 11(6):309–318

    Google Scholar 

  21. Xiaokun W, Cheng B, Chen J (2017) Collaborative filtering service recommendation based on a novel similarity computation method. IEEE Trans Serv Comput 10(3):352–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. ISO/IEC (2015/08/15) ISO/IEC 19763-5, Information technology—meta-model framework for interoperability (MFI)—part 5: meta-model for process model registration, Switzerland. https://www.iso.org/standard/53761.html. Accessed 5 Sept 2018

  23. Scheuerlein H, Rauchfuss F, Dittmar Y et al (2012) New methods for clinical pathways-business process modeling notation (BPMN) and tangible business process modeling (t.BPM). Langenbecks Arch Surg 397(5):755–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Holliday J, Willett P, Xiang H (2017) Interactions between weighting scheme and similarity coefficient in similarity-based virtual screening. Int J Chemoinform Chem Eng 2(2):28–41

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant: 2016YFC0802500, 2016YFB0800403); the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant: 61562073); the Hubei Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (2018CFC852); the Humanities and Social Sciences Planning Fund of Ministry of Education (Grant: 20171304); the Special Fund for Talent of China Three Gorges University (Grant: 8000303); and the Research Fund for Excellent Dissertation of China Three Gorges University (Grant: 2018SSPY088).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peng Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Z., Wu, J., Zhang, X. et al. Using metadata for recommending business process. J Supercomput 76, 3729–3748 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-018-2601-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-018-2601-5

Keywords

Navigation