Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mapping Artifact-Driven Monitoring Results Back to BPMN Process Diagrams

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Process Mining Workshops (ICPM 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 503))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 56 Accesses

Abstract

Artifact-driven process monitoring is a technique that exploits the E-GSM modeling language to seamlessly monitor multi-party business processes. Despite allowing greater flexibility in monitoring, E-GSM makes the modeling and understanding of monitoring results harder than imperative process modeling languages. To overcome this limitation, methods to automatically transform imperative process models into (E-)GSM models have been introduced. However, to the best of our knowledge, no approach to show monitoring results obtained with artifact-driven monitoring over the original imperative process model has been proposed. In this paper, we propose a method to map the results, and in particular execution flow violations, back to BPMN diagrams.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Elements of E-GSM not relevant for this paper (e.g., fault loggers) are omitted.

  2. 2.

    See https://bpmn.io/toolkit/bpmn-js/.

References

  1. Baresi, L., Di Ciccio, C., Mendling, J., Meroni, G., Plebani, P.: mArtifact: an artifact-driven process monitoring platform. In: BPM Demo Track 2017, vol. 1920. CEUR-WS.org (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beyer, J., Kuhn, P., Hewelt, M., Mandal, S., Weske, M.: Unicorn meets chimera: integrating external events into case management. In: BPM Demo Track 2016, pp. 67–72 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burattin, A., van Zelst, S.J., Armas-Cervantes, A., van Dongen, B.F., Carmona, J.: Online conformance checking using behavioural patterns. In: Weske, M., Montali, M., Weber, I., vom Brocke, J. (eds.) BPM 2018. LNCS, vol. 11080, pp. 250–267. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98648-7_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Damaggio, E., Hull, R., Vaculín, R.: On the equivalence of incremental and fixpoint semantics for business artifacts with guard-stage-milestone lifecycles. Inf. Syst. 38(4), 561–584 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56509-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Fahland, D., et al.: Declarative versus imperative process modeling languages: the issue of understandability. In: Halpin, T., et al. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2009. LNBIP, vol. 29, pp. 353–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01862-6_29

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Gallik, F., Kirikkayis, Y., Reichert, M.: Modeling, executing and monitoring IoT-aware processes with BPM technology. In: ICSS 2022, pp. 96–103. IEEE (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Meroni, G.: Artifact-Driven Business Process Monitoring - A Novel Approach to Transparently Monitor Business Processes, Supported by Methods, Tools, and Real-World Applications, vol. 368. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32412-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Raun, K., Tommasini, R., Awad, A.: I will survive: An event-driven conformance checking approach over process streams. In: DEBS 2023. pp. 49–60 (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schuster, D., Kolhof, G.J.: Scalable online conformance checking using incremental prefix-alignment computation. In: Hacid, H., et al. (eds.) ICSOC 2020. LNCS, vol. 12632, pp. 379–394. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76352-7_36

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Vanhatalo, J., Völzer, H., Koehler, J.: The refined process structure tree. Data Knowl. Eng. 68(9), 793–818 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. van Zelst, S.J., Bolt, A., Hassani, M., van Dongen, B.F., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Online conformance checking: relating event streams to process models using prefix-alignments. Int. J. Data Sci. Anal. 8(3), 269–284 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark

    Giovanni Meroni & Szabolcs Garda

Authors
  1. Giovanni Meroni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Szabolcs Garda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Meroni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Johannes De Smedt

  2. University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Pnina Soffer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Meroni, G., Garda, S. (2024). Mapping Artifact-Driven Monitoring Results Back to BPMN Process Diagrams. In: De Smedt, J., Soffer, P. (eds) Process Mining Workshops. ICPM 2023. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 503. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56107-8_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56107-8_36

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-56106-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-56107-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation