Process Mining from discovery to checking

1. Process Miningfrom discovery to checking Prof.dr.ir. Wil van der Aalst Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Information Systems, P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands w.m.p.v.d.aalst@tm.tue.nl

2. Outline • BPM lifecycle • Process mining overview • ProM framework • Example • discovery algorithms • LTL • Conclusion Thanks toTon Weijters, Boudewijn van Dongen, Ana Karla Alves de Medeiros, Minseok Song, Laura Maruster, Eric Verbeek, Monique Jansen-Vullers, Hajo Reijers, Michael Rosemann, Anne Rozinat, Christian Guenther Peter van den Brand, Huub de Beer, Andrey Nikolov, et al.for their on-going work on process mining.

3. The BPM life-cycle

4. 1993

5. 1998

6. 2003

7. 2008 ???

8. Design-time (a-priori) and run-time (a-posteriori) questions Run-time Design-time -verification- validation- performance analysis - process mining

9. focus of this paper

10. Process discovery: Reversing the process process discovery 1

11. Conformance testing 2

12. Log based verification formula four_eyes_principle (a1:activity,a2:activity) := forall[p:person | (!(execute(p,a1)) \/ !(execute(p,a2)))]; 3

13. ProM framework

14. ProM CPN Tools ARIS/ARIS PPM YAWL Caramba

15. Converter plug-in: EMailAnalyzer

16. XML format

17. ProM architecture

18. Example

19. Snapshot of log (100 cases)

20. Alpha plug-in (1)

21. Alpha plug-in (2)

22. Multi-phase mining plug-in

23. Genetic miner (1)

24. Genetic miner (2)

25. Social network mining plug-in

26. SNA with Netminer betweenness metric points out that the editor and the two editorial assistants are most central

27. Netminer (2)

28. LTL checker: Input

29. formula accept_or_reject_but_not_both() := {} (<>(activity == "accept") <-> !(<>(activity == "reject"))); Question 1

30. formula action_follows_decision() := {Is every decision followed by one of the three possible actions? } []( (activity == "decide" -> _O( ((activity == "accept" \/ activity == "reject") \/ activity == "invite additional reviewer") ))); Question 2

31. subformula execute( p : person, a : activity ) := {Is a specfic activity executed by a specific person?} <> ( (activity == a /\ person == p ) ) ; formula not_the_same_reviewer() := {Is every reviewer unique?} forall[p:person | (((!(execute(p,"get review 1")) \/ !(execute(p,"get review 2"))) /\ (!(execute(p,"get review 1")) \/ !(execute(p,"get review 3")))) /\ (!(execute(p,"get review 2")) \/ !(execute(p,"get review 3")))) ]; Question 3

32. subformula accept(a : activity ) := {Is the result a some activity an accept?} <> ( (activity == a /\ ate.result == "accept" ) ) ; formula dont_reject_paper_unjustified() := {Are all papers with strong support indeed accepted.} (((accept("get review 1") /\ accept("get review 2")) /\ accept("get review 3")) -> <> ( activity == "accept" ) ); Question 4 accept reject

33. formula four_eyes_principle(a1:activity,a2:activity) := { <h2>The four-eyes-principle</h2> <p> Check whether two activities are never executed by the same person for a given case.</p> <p> Arguments:<br> <ul> <li><b>a1</b> of type string denoting an activity</li> <li><b>a2</b> of type string denoting an activity</li> </ul> </p> } forall[p:person |(!(execute(p,a1)) \/ !(execute(p,a2)))]; Question 5

34. A related plug-in: Conformance checker

35. Conformance checker (1)

36. Conformance checker (2)

37. Conformance checker (3)

38. Additional plug-ins • State space analysis, invariants, EPC reduction/verification, etc.

39. Conclusion • Process mining is an exciting topic both from a practical and scientific point of view. • Join us by: • Applying this in different setting. • Contributing logs, adapters, and plug-ins. useful links: • www.processmining.org • www.workflowpatterns.com • BPMcenter.org • www.workflowcourse.com • www.citi.qut.edu.au/babel/ • www.yawl-system.com