A Tool for Aligning Event Logs and Prescriptive Process Models through Automated Planning

In Conformance Checking, alignment is the problem of detecting and repairing nonconformity between the actual execution of a business process, as recorded in an event log, and the model of the same process. Literature proposes solutions for the alignment problem that are implementations of planning algorithms built ad-hoc for the specific problem. Unfortunately, in the era of big data, these ad-hoc implementations do not scale sufficiently compared with well-established planning systems. In this paper, we tackle the above issue by presenting a tool, also available in ProM, to represent instances of the alignment problem as automated planning problems in PDDL (Planning Domain Definition Language) for which state-of-the-art planners can find a correct solution in a finite amount of time. If alignment problems are converted into planning problems, one can seamlessly update to the recent versions of the best performing automated planners, with advantages in term of versatility and customization. Furthermore, by employing several processes and event logs of different sizes, we show how our tool outperforms existing approaches of several order of magnitude and, in certain cases, carries out the task while existing approaches run out of memory

Conformance checking: A state-of-the-art literature review

Conformance checking is a set of process mining functions that compare process instances with a given process model. It identifies deviations between the process instances' actual behaviour ("as-is") and its modelled behaviour ("to-be"). Especially in the context of analyzing compliance in organizations, it is currently gaining momentum -- e.g. for auditors. Researchers have proposed a variety of conformance checking techniques that are geared towards certain process model notations or specific applications such as process model evaluation. This article reviews a set of conformance checking techniques described in 37 scholarly publications. It classifies the techniques along the dimensions "modelling language", "algorithm type", "quality metric", and "perspective" using a concept matrix so that the techniques can be better accessed by practitioners and researchers. The matrix highlights the dimensions where extant research concentrates and where blind spots exist. For instance, process miners use declarative process modelling languages often, but applications in conformance checking are rare. Likewise, process mining can investigate process roles or process metrics such as duration, but conformance checking techniques narrow on analyzing control-flow. Future research may construct techniques that support these neglected approaches to conformance checking

Towards Multi-perspective conformance checking with fuzzy sets

Conformance checking techniques are widely adopted to pinpoint possible discrepancies between process models and the execution of the process in reality. However, state of the art approaches adopt a crisp evaluation of deviations, with the result that small violations are considered at the same level of significant ones. This affects the quality of the provided diagnostics, especially when there exists some tolerance with respect to reasonably small violations, and hampers the flexibility of the process. In this work, we propose a novel approach which allows to represent actors' tolerance with respect to violations and to account for severity of deviations when assessing executions compliance. We argue that besides improving the quality of the provided diagnostics, allowing some tolerance in deviations assessment also enhances the flexibility of conformance checking techniques and, indirectly, paves the way for improving the resilience of the overall process management system.Comment: 15 pages, 5 figure

Towards Multi-perspective Conformance Checking with Fuzzy Sets

Nowadays organizations often need to employ data-driven techniques to audit their business processes and ensure they comply with laws and internal/external regulations. Failing in complying with the expected process behavior can indeed pave the way to inefficiencies or, worse, to frauds or abuses. An increasingly popular approach to automatically assess the compliance of the executions of organization processes is represented by alignment-based conformance checking. These techniques are able to compare real process executions with models representing the expected behaviors, providing diagnostics able to pinpoint possible discrepancies. However, the diagnostics generated by state of the art techniques still suffer from some limitations. They perform a crisp evaluation of process compliance, marking process behavior either as compliant or deviant, without taking into account the severity of the identified deviation. This hampers the accuracy of the obtained diagnostics and can lead to misleading results, especially in contexts where there is some tolerance with respect to violations of the process guidelines. In the present work, we discuss the impact and the drawbacks of a crisp deviation assessment approach. Then, we propose a novel conformance checking approach aimed at representing actors’ tolerance with respect to process deviations, taking it into account when assessing the severity of the deviations. As a proof of concept, we performed a set of synthetic experiments to assess the approach. The obtained results point out the potential of the usage of a more flexible evaluation of process deviations, and its impact on the quality and the interpretation of the obtained diagnostics