skip to main content
10.1145/3548785.3548786acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesideasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Running Temporal Logical Queries on the Relational Model

Authors Info & Claims
Published:13 September 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

State of the art for model checking exploit computationally intensive solutions, bottlenecked by either repeated data access or suboptimal algorithmic implementations. Our solution outperforms the previous solutions while proposing novel temporal logic operators for accessing relational tables.

References

  1. Giovanni Acampora, Autilia Vitiello, Bruno Di Stefano, Wil van der Aalst, Christian Gunther, and Eric Verbeek. 2017. IEEE 1849: The XES Standard: The Second IEEE Standard Sponsored by IEEE Computational Intelligence Society. IEEE Comp. Int. Mag. 12, 2 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Simone Agostinelli, Giacomo Bergami, Alessio Fiorenza, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, Andrea Marrella, and Fabio Patrizi. 2021. Discovering Declarative Process Model Behavior from Event Logs via Model Learning. In ICPM 2021. IEEE, 48–55.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Adriano Augusto, Ahmed Awad, and Marlon Dumas. 2021. Efficient Checking of Temporal Compliance Rules Over Business Process Event Logs. CoRR abs/2112.04623(2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ladjel Bellatreche, Mohamed Kechar, and Safia Nait Bahloul. 2021. Bringing Common Subexpression Problem from the Dark to Light: Towards Large-Scale Workload Optimizations. In IDEAS. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Giacomo Bergami. 2021. On Efficiently Equi-Joining Graphs. In IDEAS. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Giacomo Bergami, Chiara Di Francescomarino, Chiara Ghidini, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, and Joonas Puura. 2021. Exploring Business Process Deviance with Sequential and Declarative Patterns. CoRR abs/2111.12454(2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Giacomo Bergami, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, Andrea Marrella, and Marco Montali. 2021. Aligning Data-Aware Declarative Process Models and Event Logs. In Business Process Management. 235–251.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Andrea Burattin, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, and Alessandro Sperduti. 2016. Conformance checking based on multi-perspective declarative process models. Expert Syst. Appl. 65(2016), 194–211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Eduardo González López de Murillas, Hajo A. Reijers, and Wil M. P. van der Aalst. 2022. Data-Aware Process Oriented Query Language. In Process Querying Methods. Springer, 49–83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Valeria Fionda, Gianluigi Greco, and Marco Antonio Mastratisi. 2021. Reasoning About Smart Contracts Encoded in LTL. In AIxIA. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 123–136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Stratos Idreos, Fabian Groffen, Niels Nes, Stefan Manegold, K. Sjoerd Mullender, and Martin L. Kersten. 2012. MonetDB: Two Decades of Research in Column-oriented Database Architectures. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 35, 1 (2012), 40–45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Nathan John, Jeremy Gow, and Paul Cairns. 2019. Why is debugging video game AI hard?. In Proc. AISB AI & Games symposium. 20–24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Jingrui Li, Kento Goto, and Motomichi Toyama. 2021. SSstory: 3D data storytelling based on SuperSQL and Unity. In IDEAS. ACM, 173–183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Jianwen Li, Geguang Pu, Yueling Zhang, Moshe Y. Vardi, and Kristin Y. Rozier. 2020. SAT-based explicit LTLf satisfiability checking. Artificial Intelligence 289 (2020), 103369.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Felix Mannhardt, Massimiliano de Leoni, Hajo A. Reijers, and Wil M. P. van der Aalst. 2016. Balanced multi-perspective checking of process conformance. Computing 98, 4 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Youichiro Miyake. 2017. Current Status of Applying Artificial Intelligence in Digital Games. In Handbook of Digital Games and Entertainment Technologies. Springer Singapore, 253–292.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. André Petermann, Martin Junghanns, Robert Müller, and Erhard Rahm. 2014. FoodBroker - Generating Synthetic Datasets for Graph-Based Business Analytics. In WBDB’14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Jose Picado, John Davis, Arash Termehchy, and Ga Young Lee. 2020. Learning Over Dirty Data Without Cleaning. In SIGMOD Conference. ACM, 1301–1316.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Paul Pichler, Barbara Weber, Stefan Zugal, Jakob Pinggera, Jan Mendling, and Hajo A. Reijers. 2011. Imperative versus Declarative Process Modeling Languages: An Empirical Investigation. In BPM Workshops. 383–394.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Artem Polyvyanyy, Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede, Marcello La Rosa, Chun Ouyang, and Anastasiia Pika. 2019. Process Query Language: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation. Vol. abs/1909.09543.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Marcella Rovani, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, Massimiliano de Leoni, and Wil M. P. van der Aalst. 2015. Declarative process mining in healthcare. Expert Systems with Applications 42, 23 (2015), 9236–9251.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Anne Rozinat and Wil M. P. van der Aalst. 2008. Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Inf. Syst. 33, 1 (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Stefan Schönig. 2015. SQL Queries for Declarative Process Mining on Event Logs of Relational Databases. CoRR abs/1512.00196(2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Stefan Schönig, Andreas Rogge-Solti, Cristina Cabanillas, Stefan Jablonski, and Jan Mendling. 2016. Efficient and Customisable Declarative Process Mining with SQL. In CAiSE. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Running Temporal Logical Queries on the Relational Model

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            IDEAS '22: Proceedings of the 26th International Database Engineered Applications Symposium
            August 2022
            174 pages
            ISBN:9781450397094
            DOI:10.1145/3548785

            Copyright © 2022 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 13 September 2022

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate74of210submissions,35%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format