To prevent spam users, you can only post on this forum after registration, which is by invitation. If you want to post on the forum, please send me a mail (h DOT m DOT w DOT verbeek AT tue DOT nl) and I'll send you an invitation in return for an account.
This morning Eric send the following message to the ProM Developers mailing list:
This weekend, we noticed that some plug-ins ‘massage’ the result of classifier to obtain the result from a different classifier. For example, if the result of the concept name classifier would be “X”, then “X+complete” would be a valid result from the standard classifier. *Please do not do this*. If you need to know the results of some classifier on some event, run the classifier on the event, and do not start guessing around with the results of other classifiers. For example, if the result of the standard classifier is “X”, then *do not assume* that “X”is of the form “Y+Z” and do not start looking for the Y –part to obtain the result of the name classifier. First of all, we just might change the “+” into some other string, second, we just might swap “Y+Z” to “Z+Y”, and third, Y itself may contain several instances of “+” which would result in strange results.
Please note that it is not hard to obtain the results from a classifier, as the class XLogInfoImpl has a number of classifiers predefined:
If you know that your plug-in relies on assumptions as mentioned above, please change your plug-in accordingly.
Finally, please note that at 12:30 we have another ProM lunch today. Dirk Fahland will introduce us to the way he has his plug-ins tested by the Hudson server.
Senior Data Scientist and process mining expert at APG (Dutch pension fund executor).
Previously Assistant Professor in Process Mining at Eindhoven University of Technology