A Pattern Based Method for Simplifying a BPMN Process Model
Source abstract
Abstract
BPMN (Business Process Model and Notation) is currently the preferred standard for the representation and analysis of business processes. The elaboration of these BPMN diagrams is usually carried out in an entirely manual manner. As a result of this human-driven process, it is not uncommon to find diagrams that are not in their most simplified version possible (regarding the number of elements). This work presents a fully automatic method to simplify a BPMN process model document. A two-phase iterative algorithm to achieve this simplification is described in detail. This algorithm follows a heuristic approach that makes intensive use of a Pattern Repository. This software element is concerned with the description of feasible reductions and its enactment. The critical concept lies in the discovery of small reducible patterns in the whole model and their substitution with optimised versions. This approach has been verified through a double validation testing in total 8102 cases taken from real world BPMN process models. Details for its implementation and usage by practitioners are provided in this paper along with a comparison with other existing techniques concerned with similar goals.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Business Process Modeling and Analysis · Service-Oriented Architecture and Web Services · Semantic Web and Ontologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Telematic Engineering Department, Escola de Enxeñaría de Telecomunicación, Universidade de Vigo, Campus Lagoas-Marcosende, 36.310 Vigo, Galicia, Spain
Funding
Xunta de Galicia
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. Object Management Group (OMG) (2019, June 04). Business Process Model And Notation (BPMN); Version 2.0.2; OMG Document Number formal/13-12-09 2014. Available online: https://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0.2/PDF.
2. Van Der Aalst, W., Adriansyah, A., De Medeiros, A.K.A., Arcieri, F., Baier, T., Blickle, T., Bose, J.C., van den Brand, P., Brandtjen, R., and Buijs, J. (2011). Process mining manifesto. International Conference on Business Process Management, Springer.
3. Telang, P.R., Kalia, A.K., and Singh, M.P. (2015). Modeling healthcare processes using commitments: An empirical evaluation. PLoS ONE, 10.10.1371/journal.pone.0141202 ↗
4. BPMNt: A BPMN extension for specifying software process tailoring10.1016/j.infsof.2014.09.004 ↗
5. Vaziri, R., Mohsenzadeh, M., and Habibi, J. (2016). TBDQ: A Pragmatic Task-Based Method to Data Quality Assessment and Improvement. PLoS ONE, 11.10.1371/journal.pone.0154508 ↗
6. Meyer, S., Ruppen, A., and Hilty, L. (2015). The Things of the Internet of Things in BPMN. International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-19243-7_27 ↗
7. Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG)10.1016/j.infsof.2009.08.004 ↗
8. Business process model abstraction: A definition, catalog, and survey10.1007/s10619-011-7088-5 ↗
9. Bobrik, R., Reichert, M., and Bauer, T. (2007). View-based process visualization. Business Process Management, Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_7 ↗
10. Constructing customized process views10.1016/j.datak.2007.07.003 ↗
11. Tsagkani, C., and Tsalgatidou, A. (2015, January 1–3). Abstracting BPMN models. Proceedings of the 19th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics, Athens, Greece.10.1145/2801948.2802035 ↗
12. McMaster, R.B., and Shea, K.S. (1992). Generalization in Digital Cartography, Association of American Geographers.
13. Polyvyanyy, A., Smirnov, S., and Weske, M. (2008, January 27–28). Reducing Complexity of Large EPCs. Proceedings of the Lecture Notes in Informatics: Modellierung betrieblicher Informationssysteme, Gesellschaft für Informatik, Bonn, Saarbrücken, Germany.
14. Polyvyanyy, A., Smirnov, S., and Weske, M. (2009, January 23–25). On Application of Structural Decomposition for Process Model Abstraction. Proceedings of the Business Process, Services Computing and Intelligent Service Management, Leipzig, Germany.
15. Bobrik, R., Reichert, M., and Bauer, T. (2007). Parameterizable Views for Process Visualization, University of Twente.
16. Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains10.1016/S0950-5849(99)00016-6 ↗
17. Analyzing process models using graph reduction techniques10.1016/S0306-4379(00)00012-0 ↗
18. Business process variability modeling: A survey
19. Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., and Reichert, M. (2008, January 12–16). Managing Process Variants in the Process Lifecycle. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS’08), Barcelona, Spain.
20. Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., and Reichert, M. (2009, January 20–23). Guaranteeing soundness of configurable process variants in Provop. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing, Vienna, Austria.10.1109/CEC.2009.62 ↗
21. Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., and Reichert, M. (2008). Issues in modeling process variants with provop. International Conference on Business Process Management, Springer.
22. Capturing variability in business process models: The Provop approach10.1002/smr.491 ↗
23. Kumar, A., and Yao, W. (2009). Process materialization using templates and rules to design flexible process models. International Workshop on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-04985-9_13 ↗
24. Design and management of flexible process variants using templates and rules10.1016/j.compind.2011.12.002 ↗
25. Russell, N., van der Aalst, W.M., and ter Hofstede, A.H. (2016). Workflow Patterns: The Definitive Guide, MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/8085.001.0001 ↗
26. Ramos-Merino, M., Santos-Gago, J.M., Álvarez-Sabucedo, L.M., Alonso-Roris, V.M., and Sanz-Valero, J. (2018). BPMN-E2: A BPMN extension for an enhanced workflow description. Softw. Syst. Model.
27. On the use of many quality attributes for software refactoring: A many-objective search-based software engineering approach10.1007/s10664-015-9414-4 ↗
28. On the use of developers’ context for automatic refactoring of software anti-patterns10.1016/j.jss.2016.05.042 ↗
29. Multi-view refactoring of class and activity diagrams using a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm10.1007/s11219-015-9284-4 ↗
30. Jensen, A.C., and Cheng, B.H. (2010, January 7–11). On the use of genetic programming for automated refactoring and the introduction of design patterns. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, Portland, OR, USA.10.1145/1830483.1830731 ↗
31. Using model transformation to refactor use case models based on antipatterns10.1007/s10796-014-9528-z ↗
32. Supporting different process views through a shared process model10.1007/s10270-015-0453-5 ↗
33. Sahraoui, H., and Syriani, E. (2018, January 14–19). Recommending Model Refactoring Rules from Refactoring Examples. Proceedings of the 21th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark.
34. Bodhuin, T., Canfora, G., and Troiano, L. (August, January 30). SORMASA: A tool for Suggesting Model Refactoring Actions by Metrics-led Genetic Algorithm. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Refactoring Tools, WRT, Berlin, Germany.
35. Camunda (2019, May 05). BPMN Examples–Best Practices for Creating BPMN 2.0 Process Diagrams. Available online: https://camunda.com/bpmn/examples/.
36. Brosch, P., Langer, P., Seidl, M., and Wimmer, M. (2009, January 17). Towards end-user adaptable model versioning: The by-example operation recorder. Proceedings of the 2009 ICSE Workshop on Comparison and Versioning of Software Models, Vancouver, BC, USA.10.1109/CVSM.2009.5071723 ↗
37. Sun, Y., Gray, J., and White, J. (2011, January 21–28). MT-Scribe: An end-user approach to automate software model evolution. Proceedings of the 2011 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), Honolulu, HI, USA.10.1145/1985793.1985966 ↗
38. A systematic review on search-based refactoring10.1016/j.infsof.2016.11.009 ↗
39. Business process modelling challenges and solutions: A literature review10.1007/s10845-014-0917-4 ↗
40. A heuristic method for detecting problems in business process models10.1108/14637151011076485 ↗
41. ProDiGen: Mining complete, precise and minimal structure process models with a genetic algorithm10.1016/j.ins.2014.09.057 ↗
42. Vázquez-Barreiros, B., Mucientes, M., and Lam, M. (2019, February 02). ProDiGen Software. From Log to Petri Net. Available online: http://tec.citius.usc.es/processmining/prodigen.
43. Process mining: Overview and opportunities
44. Dealing with concept drifts in process mining10.1109/TNNLS.2013.2278313 ↗
45. Workflow mining: Discovering process models from event logs10.1109/TKDE.2004.47 ↗
46. Van Der Aalst, W.M. (2016). Process Mining: Data Science in Action, Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-49851-4 ↗
47. Ramos-Merino, M., Santos-Gago, J., Álvarez-Sabucedo, L., de Arriba-Pérez, F., and Simplification of BPMN Process Models (2019, April 17). Data Repository. Available online: https://osf.io/94scm/?view_only=4cebebc2e80c43fe94bb18bf16a3b95b.
48. Sun-pp236: Deployment of a tag-based system to ensure traceability management of parenteral nutrient mixtures10.1016/S0261-5614(15)30387-3 ↗
49. Bernabeu-Martínez, M.A., Merino, M.R., Gago, J.M.S., Sabucedo, L.M.Á., Wanden-Berghe, C., and Sanz-Valero, J. (2018). Guidelines for safe handling of hazardous drugs: A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 13.10.1371/journal.pone.0197172 ↗
50. Preventing occupational exposures to antineoplastic drugs in health care settings10.3322/canjclin.56.6.354 ↗
51. A BPMN Based Notation for the Representation of Workflows in Hospital Protocols10.1007/s10916-018-1034-2 ↗
52. HACCP implementation: A practical guide to the implementation of the HACCP plan10.1016/S0956-7135(97)00065-0 ↗
53. Towards a mobile-based platform for traceability control and hazard analysis in the context of parenteral nutrition: Description of a framework and a prototype app10.2196/resprot.4907 ↗
54. Towards a cost-effective and reusable traceability system. A semantic approach10.1016/j.compind.2016.08.003 ↗
55. Prom 6: The process mining toolkit