Publications 2016

  • [DOI] IEEE 1849 (XES) WG, “IEEE Standard for eXtensible Event Stream (XES) for Achieving Interoperability in Event Logs and Event Streams,” IEEE Std 1849-2016, pp. 1-50, 2016.
    [Bibtex]
    @Article{XES16,
    Title = {{IEEE Standard for eXtensible Event Stream (XES) for Achieving Interoperability in Event Logs and Event Streams}},
    Author = {{IEEE 1849 (XES) WG}},
    Journal = {{IEEE Std 1849-2016}},
    Year = {2016},
    Month = {Nov},
    Pages = {1--50},
    Doi = {10.1109/IEEESTD.2016.7740858},
    Keywords = {IEEE standards;XML;grammars;open systems;IEEE Std 1849-2016;IEEE standard;XES extension prototypes;XML schema;event logs;event streams;extensible event stream;grammar;information systems;interoperability;tag-based language;Behavioral sciences;Event recognition;Grammar;IEEE Standards;Information systems;Semantics;XML;IEEE 1849(TM);XML;event log;event stream;extensions;system behavior},
    Owner = {hverbeek},
    Timestamp = {2018.07.05}
    }
  • [PDF] H. M. W. Verbeek, “Decomposed replay using hiding and reduction,” in PNSE 2016 workshop proceedings, Torun, Poland, 2016.
    [Bibtex]
    @InProceedings{Verbeek16a,
    Title = {Decomposed Replay using Hiding and Reduction},
    Author = {Verbeek, H. M. W.},
    Booktitle = {{PNSE} 2016 Workshop Proceedings},
    Year = {2016},
    Address = {Torun, Poland},
    Editor = {Cabac, L. and Kristensen, L. and R\"{o}lke, H.},
    Month = {June},
    Note = {Accepted for publication},
    Abstract = {In the area of process mining, decomposed replay has been proposed to be able to deal with nets and logs containing many different activities. The main assumption behind this decomposition is that replaying many subnets and sublogs containing only some activities is faster then replaying a single net and log containing many activities. Although for many nets and logs this assumption does hold, there are also nets and logs for which it does not hold. This paper shows an example net and log for which the decomposed replay may take way more time, and provides an explanation why this is the case. Next, to mitigate this problem, this paper proposes an alternative decomposed replay, and shows that this alternative decomposed replay is faster than the monolithic replay even for the problematic cases as identified earlier.owever, the alternative decomposed replay is often slower than the original decomposed approach. An advantage of the alternative decomposed approach over the original approach is that its cost estimates are typically better.},
    Url = {http://www.win.tue.nl/~hverbeek/wp-content/papercite-data/pdf/verbeek16a.pdf}
    }
  • [PDF] [DOI] H. M. W. Verbeek and W. M. P. v. d. Aalst, “Merging alignments for decomposed replay,” in Application and theory of Petri nets and concurrency, Torun, Poland, 2016, pp. 219-239.
    [Bibtex]
    @InProceedings{Verbeek16,
    Title = {Merging Alignments for Decomposed Replay},
    Author = {Verbeek, H. M. W and Aalst, W. M. P. v. d.},
    Booktitle = {Application and Theory of {P}etri Nets and Concurrency},
    Year = {2016},
    Address = {Torun, Poland},
    Editor = {Kordon, F and Moldt, D.},
    Month = {June},
    Pages = {219--239},
    Publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
    Series = {LNCS},
    Volume = {9698},
    Abstract = {In the area of process mining, conformance checking aims to find an optimal alignment between an event log (which captures the activities that actually have happened) and a Petri net (which describes expected or normative behavior). Optimal alignments highlight discrepancies between observed and modeled behavior. To find an optimal alignment, a potentially challenging optimization problem needs to be solved based on a predefined cost function for misalignments. Unfortunately, this may be very time consuming for larger logs and models and often intractable. A solution is to decompose the problem of finding an optimal alignment in many smaller problems that are easier to solve. Decomposition can be used to detect conformance problems in less time and provides a lower bound for the costs of an optimal alignment. Although the existing approach is able to decide whether a trace fits or not, it does not provide an overall alignment. In this paper, we provide an algorithm that is able provide such an optimal alignment from the decomposed alignments if this is possible. Otherwise, the algorithm produces a so-called pseudo-alignment that can still be used to pinpoint non-conforming parts of log and model. The approach has been implemented in ProM and tested on various real-life event logs.},
    Doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-39086-4_14},
    Url = {http://www.win.tue.nl/~hverbeek/wp-content/papercite-data/pdf/verbeek16.pdf}
    }
  • [PDF] H. M. W. Verbeek, W. M. P. van der Aalst, and J. Munoz-Gama, “Divide and conquer,” BPMCenter.org, BPM Center Report BPM-16-06, 2016.
    [Bibtex]
    @TechReport{Verbeek16b,
    Title = {Divide and Conquer},
    Author = {Verbeek, H. M. W. and Aalst, W. M. P. van der and Munoz-Gama, J.},
    Institution = {BPMCenter.org},
    Year = {2016},
    Number = {BPM-16-06},
    Type = {BPM Center Report},
    Url = {http://bpmcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/reports/2016/BPM-16-06.pdf}
    }
  • [PDF] H. M. W. Verbeek and F. Mannhardt, “The DrFurby Classifier submission to the Process Discovery Contest @ BPM 2016,” BPMCenter.org, BPM Center Report BPM-16-08, 2016.
    [Bibtex]
    @TechReport{Verbeek16c,
    Title = {The {DrFurby Classifier} submission to the {Process Discovery Contest @ BPM 2016}},
    Author = {Verbeek, H. M. W. and Mannhardt, F.},
    Institution = {BPMCenter.org},
    Year = {2016},
    Number = {BPM-16-08},
    Type = {BPM Center Report},
    Url = {http://bpmcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/reports/2016/BPM-16-08.pdf}
    }

5 Comments

    • Eric

      In the preprint as accessible for this paper, we proposed to take the cheapest legal move in case of a conflict.In the final paper this has been changed to the most expensive legal move.

      The costs for the merged alignment are already known before merging the alignments, as one simply needs to accumulate all costs of all subalignments. As a result, the costs of the merged alignments will be a lower bound, regardless of how we deal with conflicts. To propagate all possible problems to the user (for sake of diagnosis), taking the most expensive legal move makes more sense than taking the cheapest. For example, in case of a synchronous move and a log move, taking the cheaper synchronous move would actually hide the fact that there was an issue here, while taking the log move would signal this.

Leave a Reply