=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2115/frontmatter
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2115/ATAED2018-1-5.pdf
|volume=Vol-2115
}}
==None==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2115/ATAED2018-1-5.pdf
Workshop Proceedings
Workshop on
Algorithms & Theories for the
Analysis of Event Data (ATAED’2018)
Bratislava, Slovakia, June 25, 2018
Satellite event of the conferences
18th International Conference on Application of
Concurrency to System Design (ACSD 2018)
39th International Conference on Application and Theory
of Petri Nets and Concurrency (PN 2018)
Edited by
Wil van der Aalst, Robin Bergenthum, and Josep Carmona
.
Copyright c 2018 for the individual papers is held by the papers’ authors.
Copying is permitted only for private and academic purposes.
This volume is published and copyrighted by its editors.
Preface
Ehrenfeucht and Rozenberg defined regions more than 25 years ago as sets
of nodes of a finite transition system. Every region relates to potential condi-
tions that enable or disable transition occurrences in an associated elementary
net system. Later, similar concepts were used to define regions for Petri nets
from languages as well. Both state-based and language-based approaches aim to
constrain a Petri net by adding places deduced from the set of regions. By now,
many variations have been proposed, e.g., approaches dealing with multiple to-
kens in a place, region definitions for Petri nets with inhibitor arcs, extensions
to partial languages, regions for infinite languages, etc.
Initially, region theory focused on synthesis. We require the input and the
behavior of the resulting Petri net to be equivalent. Recently, region-based re-
search started to focus on process mining as well where the goal is not to create
an equivalent model but to infer new knowledge from the input. Process min-
ing examines observed behavior rather than assuming a complete description
in terms of a transition system or prefix-closed language. For this reason, one
needs to deal with new problems such as noise and incompleteness. Equivalence
notions are replaced by trade-offs between fitness, simplicity, precision, and gen-
eralization. A model with good fitness allows for most of the behavior seen in
the event log. A model that does not generalize is “overfitting”. Overfitting is the
problem that a very specific model is generated whereas it is obvious that the log
only holds example behavior. A model that allows for “too much behavior” lacks
precision. Simplicity is related to Occam’s Razor which states that “one should
not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain
anything”. Following this principle, we look for the simplest process model that
can explain what was observed in the event log. Process discovery from event
logs is very challenging because of these and many other trade-offs. Clearly, there
are many theoretical process-mining challenges with a high practical relevance
that need to be addressed urgently.
All these challenges and opportunities are the motivation for organizing the
Algorithms & Theories for the Analysis of Event Data (ATAED) workshop. The
workshop first took place in Brussels in 2015 as a succession of the Applications
of Region Theory (ART) workshop series. The second workshop took place in
Toruń and the third in Zaragoza. After the success of these workshops, it is
only natural to bring together researchers working on region-based synthesis
and process mining again.
The ATAED’2018 workshop took place in Bratislava on June 25, 2018 and
was a satellite event of both the 39th International Conference on Application
and Theory of Petri Nets and Concurrency (Petri Nets 2018) and the 18th In-
ternational Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD
2018). Papers related to process mining, region theory and other synthesis tech-
niques were presented at ATAED’2018. These techniques have in common that
“lower level” behavioral descriptions (event logs, partial languages, transition sys-
tems, etc.) are used to create “higher level” process models (e.g., various classes
of Petri nets, BPMN, or UML activity diagrams). In fact, all techniques that
aim at learning or checking concurrent behavior from transition systems, runs,
or event logs were welcomed. The workshop was supported by the IEEE Task
Force on Process Mining (www.win.tue.nl/ieeetfpm/).
After a careful reviewing process, seven papers were accepted for the work-
shop. Overall, the quality of the submitted papers was good and most submis-
sions matched the workshop goals very well. We thank the reviewers for providing
the authors with valuable and constructive feedback. Moreover, we were honored
that Stefanie Rinderle-Ma was willing to give an invited talk on “Challenges
in Business Process Intelligence: Compliance, Collaboration, and Change”. We
thank Stefanie, the authors, and the presenters for their wonderful contributions.
Enjoy reading the proceedings!
Wil van der Aalst, Robin Bergenthum, and Josep Carmona
June 2018
Program committee of ATAED’2018
Wil van der Aalst, RWTH Aachen, Germany (co-chair)
Abel Armas Cervantes, QUT, Australia
Eric Badouel, INRIA Rennes, France
Robin Bergenthum, FernUni Hagen, Germany (co-chair)
Luca Bernardinello, Universitá degli studi di Milano-Bicocca, Italy
Andrea Burattin, University of Innsbruck, Austria
Josep Carmona, UPC Barcelona, Spain (co-chair)
Paolo Ceravolo, University of Milan, Italy
Claudio Di Ciccio, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria
Benoît Depaire, Hasselt University, Belgium
Jörg Desel, FernUni Hagen, Germany
Dirk Fahland, TU Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Chiara Di Francescomarino, FBK-IRST, Italy
Stefan Haar, LSV CNRS & ENS de Cachan, France
Gabriel Juhás, Slovak University of Technology, Slovak Republic
Anna Kalenkova, Higher School of Economics NRU, Russia
Jetty Kleijn, Leiden University, The Netherlands
Wen Lijie, Tsinghua University, China
Robert Lorenz, Uni Augsburg, Germany
Manuel Mucientes, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Marta Pietkiewicz-Koutny, Newcastle University, GB
Uli Schlachter, Uni Oldenburg, Germany
Arik Senderovich, Technion, Israel
Matthias Weidlich, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany
Jochen De Weerdt, KU Leuven, Belgium
Moe Wynn, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Alex Yakovlev, Newcastle University, GB
Table of Contents
Pieter Kwantes and Jetty Kleijn
On the synthesis of industry level process
models from enterprise level process models 6 - 22
Luca Bernardinello, Irina Lomazova,
Roman Nesterov, and Lucia Pomello
Compositional Discovery of Workflow Nets from
Event Logs Using Morphisms 23 - 38
Luca Bernardinello, Carlo Ferigato,
Lucia Pomello, and Adrián Puerto Aubel
On the Decomposition of Regional Events in Elementary Systems 39 - 55
Wil M.P. van der Aalst
Relating Process Models and Event Logs
21 Conformance Propositions 56 - 74
Raymond Devillers, Evgeny Erofeev, and Thomas Hujsa
Synthesis of Weighted Marked Graphs from
Constrained Labelled Transition Systems 75 - 90
Kamila Barylska, Anna Gogolińska, Łukasz Mikulski,
Anna Philippou, Marcin Piątkowski, and Kyriaki Psara
Reversing Computations Modelled by Coloured Petri Nets 91 - 111
Georgy Lukyanov and Andrey Mokhov
Concurrency Oracles for Free 112 - 127