Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

blogs:pub2005:conformance_testing_measuring_the_fit_and_appropriateness_of_event_logs_and_process_models [2009/05/25 12:24] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +====== Conformance Testing: Measuring the Fit and Appropriateness of Event Logs and Process Models ======
  
 +A. Rozinat and W.M.P. van der Aalst\\
 +//Workshop on Business Process Intelligence (BPI), Nancy, 2005//\\
 +
 +A. Rozinat and W.M.P. van der Aalst\\
 +//C. Bussler et al., editor, Business Process Management 2005 Workshops, volume 3812 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 163–176. Springer-Verlag,​ Berlin, 2006//\\
 +
 +===== Abstract =====
 +
 +Most information systems log events (e.g., transaction logs,
 +audit trails) to audit and monitor the processes they support. At the
 +same time, many of these processes have been explicitly modeled. For
 +example, SAP R/3 logs events in transaction logs and there are EPCs
 +(Event-driven Process Chains) describing the so-called reference models.
 +These reference models describe how the system should be used. The coexistence
 +of event logs and process models raises an interesting question:
 +“Does the event log conform to the process model and vice versa?”. This
 +paper demonstrates that there is not a simple answer to this question. To
 +tackle the problem, we distinguish two dimensions of conformance:​ fitness
 +(the event log may be the result of the process modeled) and appropriateness
 +(the model is a likely candidate from a structural and behavioral
 +point of view). Different metrics have been defined and a Conformance
 +Checker has been implemented within the ProM Framework.
 +
 +===== Links =====
 +
 +{{publications:​Rozinat2005b.pdf|Download PDF}} (2,158 KB)