I am still reading Sander Leemans' thesis, and now I wonder whether Inductive Miner - directly follows would actually ever be forced to fall through to a flower model.
Suppose there is no looping behavior. Then one would always expect to find an XOR or sequence cut.
Suppose there is looping behavior, and one can find neither a loop nor a parallel cut. Then ex hypothesi strictDfgTauLoop or dfgTauLoop would apply, until there is no more looping behavior.
Am I correct? I have not been able to construct a counterexample to my reasoning. There is no example in Sander's thesis either, as far as I can see. Perhaps I have overlooked it.