Skip to main content

Simulation of Multi-perspective Declarative Process Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Business Process Management Workshops (BPM 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 281))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Flexible business processes can often be represented more easily using a declarative process modeling language (DPML) rather than an imperative language. Process mining techniques can be used to automate the discovery of process models. One way to evaluate process mining techniques is to synthesize event logs from a source model via simulation techniques and to compare the discovered model with the source model. Though there are several declarative process mining techniques, there is a lack of simulation approaches. Process models also involve multiple aspects, like the flow of activities and resource assignment constraints. The simulation approach at hand automatically synthesizes event logs that conform to a given model specified in the multi-perspective, declarative language DPIL. Our technique translates DPIL constraints to a logic language called Alloy. A formula-analysis step is the actual log generation. We evaluate our technique with a concise example and describe an alternative configuration to simulate event logs based on an assumed partial execution as well as on properties that are intended to be checked. We complement the quality evaluation by a performance analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Download: http://www.eclipse.org/acceleo, last access: July 22, 2016.

  2. 2.

    Standard: http://www.omg.org/spec/MOFM2T/1.0/, last access: July 22, 2016.

  3. 3.

    Screenshot and Download (incl. example data): http://mps.kppq.de.

References

  1. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Business process simulation revisited. Enterp. Organ. Model. Simul. 63, 1–14 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Frank, U.: Multi-perspective enterprise modeling (memo) conceptual framework and modeling languages. In: HICSS, pp. 1258–1267 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown, A.L., Kane, M.J.: Preschool children can learn to transfer: learning to learn and learning from example. Cogn. Psychol. 20, 493–523 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Schönig, S., Cabanillas, C., Jablonski, S., Mendling, J.: Mining the organisational perspective in agile business processes. In: BPMDS, pp. 37–52 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Di Ciccio, C., Bernardi, M.L., Cimitile, M., Maggi, F.M.: Generating event logs through the simulation of declare models. In: Barjis, J., Pergl, R., Babkin, E. (eds.) EOMAS 2015. LNBIP, vol. 231, pp. 20–36. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24626-0_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. De Medeiros, A.A., Günther, C.W.: Process mining: using cpn tools to create test logs for mining algorithms. In: Proceedings of CPN, vol. 576 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burattin, A., Sperduti, A.: PLG: a framework for the generation of business process models and their execution logs. In: Muehlen, M., Su, J. (eds.) BPM 2010. LNBIP, vol. 66, pp. 214–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20511-8_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Fahland, D., Lübke, D., Mendling, J., Reijers, H., Weber, B., Weidlich, M., Zugal, S.: Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of understandability. In: Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Ukor, R. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2009. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 353–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01862-6_29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Pichler, P., Weber, B., Zugal, S., Pinggera, J., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Imperative versus declarative process modeling languages: an empirical investigation. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds.) BPM 2011. LNBIP, vol. 99, pp. 383–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-28108-2_37

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Zeising, M., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Towards a common platform for the support of routine and agile business processes. In: CollaborateCom (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Maggi, F.M., Bose, R.P.J.C., Aalst, W.M.P.: A knowledge-based integrated approach for discovering and repairing declare maps. In: Salinesi, C., Norrie, M.C., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) CAiSE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7908, pp. 433–448. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38709-8_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Schönig, S., Rogge-Solti, A., Cabanillas, C., Jablonski, S., Mendling, J.: Efficient and customisable declarative process mining with SQL. In: Nurcan, S., Soffer, P., Bajec, M., Eder, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9694, pp. 290–305. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39696-5_18

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ackermann, L., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S.: Towards simulation- and mining-based translation of resource-aware process models. In: Proceedings of ReMa (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Montali, M., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Maggi, F.M.: Towards data-aware constraints in declare. In: Proceedings of the 28th SAC, pp. 1391–1396. ACM (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Barba, I., Weber, B., Del Valle, C., Jiménez-Ramírez, A.: User recommendations for the optimized execution of business processes. DKE 86, 61–84 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Warmer, J.B., Kleppe, A.G.: The Object Constraint Language: Precise Modeling With Uml (Addison-Wesley OTS). Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zazkis, R., Chernoff, E.J.: What makes a counterexample exemplary? Educ. Stud. Math. 68(3), 195–208 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bussler, C.: Analysis of the organization modeling capability of workflow-management-systems. In: PRIISM 1996 Conference Proceedings, pp. 438–455 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Object Management Group (OMG): Business process model and notation (bpmn) version 2.0. Technical report, January 2011

    Google Scholar 

  21. van der Aalst, W.: Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes, vol. 2. Springer, New York (2011)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Verbeek, H.M.W., Buijs, J.C.A.M., Dongen, B.F., Aalst, W.M.P.: XES, XESame, and ProM 6. In: Soffer, P., Proper, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2010. LNBIP, vol. 72, pp. 60–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17722-4_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Prof. Westfechtel, Felix Schwägerl (University of Bayreuth) and Prof. Daniel Jackson (MIT) for providing tips and literature about modeling and analysis with Alloy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Ackermann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ackermann, L., Schönig, S., Jablonski, S. (2017). Simulation of Multi-perspective Declarative Process Models. In: Dumas, M., Fantinato, M. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2016. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 281. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58457-7_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58457-7_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58456-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58457-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics