skip to main content
tutorial

Outcome-Oriented Predictive Process Monitoring: Review and Benchmark

Published:13 March 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Predictive business process monitoring refers to the act of making predictions about the future state of ongoing cases of a business process, based on their incomplete execution traces and logs of historical (completed) traces. Motivated by the increasingly pervasive availability of fine-grained event data about business process executions, the problem of predictive process monitoring has received substantial attention in the past years. In particular, a considerable number of methods have been put forward to address the problem of outcome-oriented predictive process monitoring, which refers to classifying each ongoing case of a process according to a given set of possible categorical outcomes—e.g., Will the customer complain or not? Will an order be delivered, canceled, or withdrawn? Unfortunately, different authors have used different datasets, experimental settings, evaluation measures, and baselines to assess their proposals, resulting in poor comparability and an unclear picture of the relative merits and applicability of different methods. To address this gap, this article presents a systematic review and taxonomy of outcome-oriented predictive process monitoring methods, and a comparative experimental evaluation of eleven representative methods using a benchmark covering 24 predictive process monitoring tasks based on nine real-life event logs.

References

  1. James S. Bergstra, Rémi Bardenet, Yoshua Bengio, and Balázs Kégl. 2011. Algorithms for hyper-parameter optimization. In NIPS. 2546--255. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Andrew P. Bradley. 1997. The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recognition 30, 7 (1997), 1145--1159. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Leo Breiman. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learning 45, 1 (2001), 5--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Malu Castellanos, Norman Salazar, Fabio Casati, Umesh Dayal, and Ming-Chien Shan. 2005. Predictive business operations management. In International Workshop on Databases in Networked Information Systems. Springer, 1--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Raffaele Conforti, Massimiliano De Leoni, Marcello La Rosa, and Wil MP Van Der Aalst. 2013. Supporting risk-informed decisions during business process execution. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 116--132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Raffaele Conforti, Massimiliano de Leoni, Marcello La Rosa, Wil M. P. van der Aalst, and Arthur HM ter Hofstede. 2015. A recommendation system for predicting risks across multiple business process instances. Decision Support Systems 69 (2015), 1--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Massimiliano De Leoni, Wil M. P. van der Aalst, and Marcus Dees. 2014. A general framework for correlating business process characteristics. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 250--266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Massimiliano de Leoni, Wil M. P. van der Aalst, and Marcus Dees. 2016. A general process mining framework for correlating, predicting and clustering dynamic behavior based on event logs. Information Systems 56 (2016), 235--257. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Janez Demšar. 2006. Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. Journal of Machine Learning Research 7 (January 2006), 1--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Chiara Di Francescomarino, Marlon Dumas, Fabrizio M. Maggi, and Irene Teinemaa. 2017. Clustering-based predictive process monitoring. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Marlon Dumas, Marcello La Rosa, Jan Mendling, and Hajo A. Reijers. 2018. Fundamentals of Business Process Management (2nd ed.). Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Joerg Evermann, Jana-Rebecca Rehse, and Peter Fettke. 2016. A deep learning approach for predicting process behaviour at runtime. In Business Process Management Workshops. Springer, 327--338.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Manuel Fernández-Delgado, Eva Cernadas, Senén Barro, and Dinani Amorim. 2014. Do we need hundreds of classifiers to solve real world classification problems. Journal of Machine Learning Research 15, 1 (2014), 3133--3181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Francesco Folino, Massimo Guarascio, and Luigi Pontieri. 2014. Mining predictive process models out of low-level multidimensional logs. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 533--547.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jerome H. Friedman. 2001. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Annals of Statistics 29, 5 (2001), 1189--1232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Mohamed F. Ghalwash and Zoran Obradovic. 2012. Early classification of multivariate temporal observations by extraction of interpretable shapelets. BMC Bioinformatics 13, 1 (2012), 195.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Mohamed F. Ghalwash, Vladan Radosavljevic, and Zoran Obradovic. 2013. Extraction of interpretable multivariate patterns for early diagnostics. In IEEE 13th International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM’13). IEEE, 201--210.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Johny Ghattas, Pnina Soffer, and Mor Peleg. 2014. Improving business process decision making based on past experience. Decision Support Systems 59 (2014), 93--107. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Guoliang He, Yong Duan, Rong Peng, Xiaoyuan Jing, Tieyun Qian, and Lingling Wang. 2015. Early classification on multivariate time series. Neurocomputing 149 (2015), 777--787. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Barbara Kitchenham. 2004. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University 33, 2004 (2004), 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Geetika T. Lakshmanan, Songyun Duan, Paul T. Keyser, Francisco Curbera, and Rania Khalaf. 2010. Predictive analytics for semi-structured case oriented business processes. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 640--651.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Anna Leontjeva, Raffaele Conforti, Chiara Di Francescomarino, Marlon Dumas, and Fabrizio Maria Maggi. 2015. Complex symbolic sequence encodings for predictive monitoring of business processes. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 297--313. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Yu-Feng Lin, Hsuan-Hsu Chen, Vincent S. Tseng, and Jian Pei. 2015. Reliable early classification on multivariate time series with numerical and categorical attributes. In Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Springer, 199--211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Abderrahmane Maaradji, Marlon Dumas, Marcello La Rosa, and Alireza Ostovar. 2017. Detecting sudden and gradual drifts in business processes from execution traces. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 29, 10 (2017), 2140--2154.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Fabrizio Maria Maggi, Chiara Di Francescomarino, Marlon Dumas, and Chiara Ghidini. 2014. Predictive monitoring of business processes. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer, 457--472.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Andreas Metzger, Rod Franklin, and Yagil Engel. 2012. Predictive monitoring of heterogeneous service-oriented business networks: The transport and logistics case. In 2012 Annual SRII Global Conference. IEEE Computer Society, 313--322. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Andreas Metzger, Philipp Leitner, Dragan Ivanovic, Eric Schmieders, Rod Franklin, Manuel Carro, Schahram Dustdar, and Klaus Pohl. 2015. Comparing and combining predictive business process monitoring techniques. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems 45, 2 (2015), 276--290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Randal S. Olson, William La Cava, Zairah Mustahsan, Akshay Varik, and Jason H. Moore. 2018. Data-driven advice for applying machine learning to bioinformatics problems. In Proceedings of the Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, Russ B. Altman, A. Keith Dunker, Lawrence Hunter, Marylyn D. Ritchie, and Teri E. Klein (Eds.). 192–203. http://psb.stanford.edu/psb-online/proceedings/psb18/olson.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Alireza Ostovar, Abderrahmane Maaradji, Marcello La Rosa, and Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede. 2017. Characterizing drift from event streams of business processes. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’17). Springer, 210--228.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Alireza Ostovar, Abderrahmane Maaradji, Marcello La Rosa, Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede, and Boudewijn F. van Dongen. 2016. Detecting drift from event streams of unpredictable business processes. In International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER’16). LNCS, Springer, 330--346.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (2011), 2825--2830. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Amir Pnueli. 1977. The temporal logic of programs. In 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 46--57. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Andreas Rogge-Solti and Mathias Weske. 2013. Prediction of remaining service execution time using stochastic petri nets with arbitrary firing delays. In International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing (ICSOC’13). Springer, 389--403. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Andrii Rozumnyi. 2017. A Dashboard-Based Predictive Process Monitoring Engine. Master’s thesis. University of Tartu.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Felix Salfner, Maren Lenk, and Miroslaw Malek. 2010. A survey of online failure prediction methods. ACM Computing Surveys 42, 3 (2010), 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Bernd Schwegmann, Martin Matzner, and Christian Janiesch. 2013. A method and tool for predictive event-driven process analytics. In Wirtschaftsinformatik. Citeseer, 46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Bernd Schwegmann, Martin Matzner, and Christian Janiesch. 2013. preCEP: Facilitating predictive event-driven process analytics. In International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems. Springer, 448--455. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Arik Senderovich, Chiara Di Francescomarino, Chiara Ghidini, Kerwin Jorbina, and Fabrizio Maria Maggi. 2017. Intra and inter-case features in predictive process monitoring: A tale of two dimensions. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 306--323.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Niek Tax, Ilya Verenich, Marcello La Rosa, and Marlon Dumas. 2017. Predictive business process monitoring with LSTM neural networks. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE’17). Springer, 477--492.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Irene Teinemaa, Marlon Dumas, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, and Chiara Di Francescomarino. 2016. Predictive business process monitoring with structured and unstructured data. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 401--417.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Wil M. P. van der Aalst. 2016. Process Mining: Data Science in Action. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. W. M. P. Van Der Aalst, Vladimir Rubin, H. M. W. Verbeek, Boudewijn F. van Dongen, Ekkart Kindler, and Christian W. Günther. 2010. Process mining: A two-step approach to balance between underfitting and overfitting. Software and Systems Modeling 9, 1 (2010), 87--111.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Sjoerd Van Der Spoel, Maurice Van Keulen, and Chintan Amrit. 2012. Process prediction in noisy data sets: A case study in a dutch hospital. In International Symposium on Data-Driven Process Discovery and Analysis. Springer, 60--83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Boudewijn F. van Dongen, Ronald A. Crooy, and Wil M. P. van der Aalst. 2008. Cycle time prediction: When will this case finally be finished? In OTM Confederated International Conferences “On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems”. Springer, 319--336. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Ilya Verenich, Marlon Dumas, Marcello La Rosa, Fabrizio Maria Maggi, and Chiara Di Francescomarino. 2015. Complex symbolic sequence clustering and multiple classifiers for predictive process monitoring. In International Conference on Business Process Management. Springer, 218--229.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhengzheng Xing and Jian Pei. 2010. Exploring disease association from the NHANES data: Data mining, pattern summarization, and visual analytics. International Journal of Data Warehousing and Mining 6, 3 (2010), 11--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Zhengzheng Xing, Jian Pei, Guozhu Dong, and Philip S. Yu. 2008. Mining sequence classifiers for early prediction. In 2008 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining. SIAM, 644--655.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Outcome-Oriented Predictive Process Monitoring: Review and Benchmark

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data
      ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data  Volume 13, Issue 2
      April 2019
      342 pages
      ISSN:1556-4681
      EISSN:1556-472X
      DOI:10.1145/3319626
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 13 March 2019
      • Accepted: 1 December 2018
      • Revised: 1 October 2018
      • Received: 1 August 2017
      Published in tkdd Volume 13, Issue 2

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • tutorial
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format