@article{WeidlichPolyvyanyyDesaietal.2011, author = {Weidlich, Matthias and Polyvyanyy, Artem and Desai, Nirmit and Mendling, Jan and Weske, Mathias}, title = {Process compliance analysis based on behavioural profiles}, series = {Information systems}, volume = {36}, journal = {Information systems}, number = {7}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0306-4379}, doi = {10.1016/j.is.2011.04.002}, pages = {1009 -- 1025}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Process compliance measurement is getting increasing attention in companies due to stricter legal requirements and market pressure for operational excellence. In order to judge on compliance of the business processing, the degree of behavioural deviation of a case, i.e., an observed execution sequence, is quantified with respect to a process model (referred to as fitness, or recall). Recently, different compliance measures have been proposed. Still, nearly all of them are grounded on state-based techniques and the trace equivalence criterion, in particular. As a consequence, these approaches have to deal with the state explosion problem. In this paper, we argue that a behavioural abstraction may be leveraged to measure the compliance of a process log - a collection of cases. To this end, we utilise causal behavioural profiles that capture the behavioural characteristics of process models and cases, and can be computed efficiently. We propose different compliance measures based on these profiles, discuss the impact of noise in process logs on our measures, and show how diagnostic information on non-compliance is derived. As a validation, we report on findings of applying our approach in a case study with an international service provider.}, language = {en} } @article{PolyvyanyyGarciaBanuelosFahlandetal.2014, author = {Polyvyanyy, Artem and Garcia-Banuelos, Luciano and Fahland, Dirk and Weske, Mathias}, title = {Maximal structuring of acyclic process models}, series = {The computer journal : a publication of the British Computer Society}, volume = {57}, journal = {The computer journal : a publication of the British Computer Society}, number = {1}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0010-4620}, doi = {10.1093/comjnl/bxs126}, pages = {12 -- 35}, year = {2014}, abstract = {This article addresses the transformation of a process model with an arbitrary topology into an equivalent structured process model. In particular, this article studies the subclass of process models that have no equivalent well-structured representation but which, nevertheless, can be partially structured into their maximally-structured representation. The transformations are performed under a behavioral equivalence notion that preserves the observed concurrency of tasks in equivalent process models. The article gives a full characterization of the subclass of acyclic process models that have no equivalent well-structured representation, but do have an equivalent maximally-structured one, as well as proposes a complete structuring method. Together with our previous results, this article completes the solution of the process model structuring problem for the class of acyclic process models.}, language = {en} } @book{PolyvyanyySmirnovWeske2008, author = {Polyvyanyy, Artem and Smirnov, Sergey and Weske, Mathias}, title = {The triconnected abstraction of process models}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-940793-65-2}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32847}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {17}, year = {2008}, abstract = {Contents: Artem Polyvanny, Sergey Smirnow, and Mathias Weske The Triconnected Abstraction of Process Models 1 Introduction 2 Business Process Model Abstraction 3 Preliminaries 4 Triconnected Decomposition 4.1 Basic Approach for Process Component Discovery 4.2 SPQR-Tree Decomposition 4.3 SPQR-Tree Fragments in the Context of Process Models 5 Triconnected Abstraction 5.1 Abstraction Rules 5.2 Abstraction Algorithm 6 Related Work and Conclusions}, language = {en} } @book{AlnemrPolyvyanyyAbuJarouretal.2010, author = {Alnemr, Rehab and Polyvyanyy, Artem and AbuJarour, Mohammed and Appeltauer, Malte and Hildebrandt, Dieter and Thomas, Ivonne and Overdick, Hagen and Sch{\"o}bel, Michael and Uflacker, Matthias and Kluth, Stephan and Menzel, Michael and Schmidt, Alexander and Hagedorn, Benjamin and Pascalau, Emilian and Perscheid, Michael and Vogel, Thomas and Hentschel, Uwe and Feinbube, Frank and Kowark, Thomas and Tr{\"u}mper, Jonas and Vogel, Tobias and Becker, Basil}, title = {Proceedings of the 4th Ph.D. Retreat of the HPI Research School on Service-oriented Systems Engineering}, editor = {Meinel, Christoph and Plattner, Hasso and D{\"o}llner, J{\"u}rgen Roland Friedrich and Weske, Mathias and Polze, Andreas and Hirschfeld, Robert and Naumann, Felix and Giese, Holger}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-036-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-40838}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {Getr. Z{\"a}hlung}, year = {2010}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Polyvyanyy2012, author = {Polyvyanyy, Artem}, title = {Structuring process models}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-59024}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2012}, abstract = {One can fairly adopt the ideas of Donald E. Knuth to conclude that process modeling is both a science and an art. Process modeling does have an aesthetic sense. Similar to composing an opera or writing a novel, process modeling is carried out by humans who undergo creative practices when engineering a process model. Therefore, the very same process can be modeled in a myriad number of ways. Once modeled, processes can be analyzed by employing scientific methods. Usually, process models are formalized as directed graphs, with nodes representing tasks and decisions, and directed arcs describing temporal constraints between the nodes. Common process definition languages, such as Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) and Event-driven Process Chain (EPC) allow process analysts to define models with arbitrary complex topologies. The absence of structural constraints supports creativity and productivity, as there is no need to force ideas into a limited amount of available structural patterns. Nevertheless, it is often preferable that models follow certain structural rules. A well-known structural property of process models is (well-)structuredness. A process model is (well-)structured if and only if every node with multiple outgoing arcs (a split) has a corresponding node with multiple incoming arcs (a join), and vice versa, such that the set of nodes between the split and the join induces a single-entry-single-exit (SESE) region; otherwise the process model is unstructured. The motivations for well-structured process models are manifold: (i) Well-structured process models are easier to layout for visual representation as their formalizations are planar graphs. (ii) Well-structured process models are easier to comprehend by humans. (iii) Well-structured process models tend to have fewer errors than unstructured ones and it is less probable to introduce new errors when modifying a well-structured process model. (iv) Well-structured process models are better suited for analysis with many existing formal techniques applicable only for well-structured process models. (v) Well-structured process models are better suited for efficient execution and optimization, e.g., when discovering independent regions of a process model that can be executed concurrently. Consequently, there are process modeling languages that encourage well-structured modeling, e.g., Business Process Execution Language (BPEL) and ADEPT. However, the well-structured process modeling implies some limitations: (i) There exist processes that cannot be formalized as well-structured process models. (ii) There exist processes that when formalized as well-structured process models require a considerable duplication of modeling constructs. Rather than expecting well-structured modeling from start, we advocate for the absence of structural constraints when modeling. Afterwards, automated methods can suggest, upon request and whenever possible, alternative formalizations that are "better" structured, preferably well-structured. In this thesis, we study the problem of automatically transforming process models into equivalent well-structured models. The developed transformations are performed under a strong notion of behavioral equivalence which preserves concurrency. The findings are implemented in a tool, which is publicly available.}, language = {en} }