• Save

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Meronymy-based Aggregation of Activities in Business Process Models

on

  • 1,070 views

As business process management is increasingly applied in practice, more companies document their operations in the form of process models. Since users require descriptions of one process on various ...

As business process management is increasingly applied in practice, more companies document their operations in the form of process models. Since users require descriptions of one process on various levels of detail, there are often multiple models created for the same process. Business process model abstraction emerged as a technique reducing the number of models to be stored: given a detailed process model, business process model abstraction delivers abstract representations for the same process. A key problem in many abstraction scenarios is the transition from detailed activities in the initial model to coarse-grained activities in the abstract model. This transition is realized by an aggregation operation clustering multiple activities to a single one. So far, humans decide on how to aggregate, which is expensive. This paper presents a semi-automated approach to activity aggregation that reduces the human effort significantly. The approach takes advantage of an activity meronymy relation, i.e., part-of relation defined between activities. The approach is semi-automated, as it proposes sets of meaningful aggregations, while the user still decides. The approach is evaluated by a real-world use case.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,070
Views on SlideShare
1,070
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Meronymy-based Aggregation of Activities in Business Process Models Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Meronymy-based Aggregation of Activities in Business Process Models Sergey Smirnov 1 , Remco Dijkman 2 , Jan Mendling 3 , and Mathias Weske 1 1 Hasso Plattner Institute, Germany 2 Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands 3 Humboldt-Universit ä t zu Berlin, Germany
  • 2. Motivation Meronymy-based Aggregation of Activities in Business Process Models
      • > 300 nodes
      • > 150 activities
  • 3. Business Process Model Abstraction
    • … is an operation on a business process model preserving essential process properties and leaving out insignificant process details in order to retain information relevant for a particular purpose
  • 4. BPMA Scenario
    • Abstraction objects = Activities
    • Abstraction operation = Aggregation
  • 5. Structural BPMA Challenges Candidate 1 Candidate 2 ? Candidate 1 Candidate 2
  • 6. Activity Ontology
  • 7. Role of Activity Ontology in BPMA Candidate 1 Candidate 2 ? Candidate 1 Candidate 2
  • 8. Aggregation Mining Idea
    • Input: Process model + Ontology
    • Output: Aggregations
    • Algorithm Sketch:
    • FOR each aggregation candidate
    • map each aggregation candidate activity to
    • an ontology activity
    • IF ( ontology activities are strongly related)
    • aggregation candidate is an aggregation
    How to find an aggregation candidate efficiently? How to judge on ontology activity relatedness?
  • 9. Activity Alphabet
  • 10. Process Model
    • is a process model, where:
    • finite non-empty set of activities
    • finite set of gateways
    • finite set of nodes
    • the flow relation
    • a connected graph
  • 11. Aggregation Candidate
    • In process model
    • is an aggregation candidate.
  • 12. Meronymy Tree Meronymy tree is a tuple
  • 13. Meronymy Forest
    • Meronymy forest F is a disjoint union of meronymy trees
  • 14. Aggregation Candidate Construction
    • Construction of aggregation candidates aggregation through aggregation candidate size increment
    • start: k =2
    • i iteration: construct i -size aggregation candidates
    • from (i-1) aggregation candidates
    • prune insignificant candidates
    • prune candidates with large distance
    • stop: k=|A|, PM = (A, G, E) OR all the aggregation
    • candidates of size k are pruned
  • 15. Activity Match (1) Process model Meronymy forest
  • 16. Activity Match (2) Process model Meronymy forest
  • 17. Activity MixMatch Process model Meronymy forest n 1 g n 14 n 15 n 1 g n 15 n 14
  • 18. Lowest Common Ancestor
    • Lowest common ancestor is a function
    • maps a tree node set to its
    • lowest common ancestor
  • 19. Meronymy Leaves
    • Meronymy leaves is a function
    • maps an activity to the leaves
    • of the subtree rooted to
    • this activity
  • 20. Degree of Aggregation Coverage (1)
    • Degree of aggregation coverage is a function
  • 21. Degree of Aggregation Coverage (2)
    • Degree of aggregation coverage is a function
  • 22. Degree of Aggregation Coverage Properties
    • Shows
    • if the LCA has other descendents,
    • except aggregation candidate
    • Ignores
    • aggregation candidate size
    • the aggregation candidate
    • depth in the LCA subtree
    • ignore the LCA depth
    • Possesses
    • value between 0 and 1
  • 23. Object Studied in Evaluation
    • Model collection
    • 6 process models (42 activities on average)
    • Meronymy forest
    • MIT Process Handbook
    • processes elicited in the interviews with process experts
    • ≈ 5000 activities
    • specifies meronymy and hyponymy
    • spans several business domains
  • 24. Evaluation Approach
    • Each activity aggregation is decomposed into a set
    • of subsets of size 2, e.g.:
    • {a, b, c} -> {a, b}, {a, c}, {b, c}
    • Modeling expert evaluates pair relevance
    • Experiments varying node distance , cover
    • Observe the precision value
  • 25. Evaluation Results Observations 0.27 ≤ precision ≤ 0.46 ↑ cover -> ↑ precision ↑ node distance -> ↓ precision
  • 26. Conclusion
    • Contributions
    • Metric for relatedness
    • of activity sets
    • Activity aggregation
    • mining algorithm
    • Future work
    • Improve activity
    • matching technique
    • Precise aggregation
    • mining technique
    • evaluation
    • Investigate other
    • information enabling
    • activity aggregation
  • 27.
    • Thank you!
  • 28. Contact Details
    • Sergey Smirnov
    • PhD Student
    • Business Process Technology Group
    • Hasso Plattner Institute
    • Prof.-Dr.-Helmert-Str. 2-3, 14482 Potsdam, Germany
    • Email: sergey.smirnov@hpi.uni-potsdam.de
    • Phone: +49 (0) 331 5509 194
    • Fax: +49(0) 331 5509 189