Identification of the standby intervals in the business processes based on analysis of the sequence of events

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/2312-8372.2016.80970

Keywords:

business process, intelligent process analysis, process control, resources, expectation interval

Abstract

Business processes that share resources are studied. It is shown that reduction of control efficiency of these processes associated with waiting for access to shared resources. The necessary and sufficient conditions for the occurrence of standby intervals during the process execution are identified based on the study of business processes logs. A method for identifying standby intervals of process resources is proposed based on the attribute analysis, recorded in the event log, in the case that the number of available resource varies during process execution. The method allows to obtain association rules, which establish a change connection of the event attributes to the transition from the process action to the expectation interval. The inclusion of such rules in the business process model, which is obtained by the methods of process mining, allows to predict the emergence of delays in the process implementation. This method creates conditions for improving the process control efficiency by reducing delays in practice.

Author Biographies

Сергей Федорович Чалый, Kharkiv National University of Radio Electronics, Nauka ave., 16, Kharkiv, Ukraine, 61166

Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor

Department of Information Control Systems

Игорь Викторович Левыкин, Kharkiv National University of Radio Electronics, Nauka ave., 16, Kharkiv, Ukraine, 61166

Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor

Department of Information Control Systems

References

  1. Weske, М. (2007). Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 368. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-73522-9
  2. Maier, R., Remus, U. (2002). Defining process-oriented knowledge management strategies. Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 9, № 2, 103–118. doi:10.1002/kpm.136
  3. Van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2011). Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 352. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19345-3
  4. Van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2014). Process Mining in the Large: A Tutorial. Business Intelligence. Springer Science + Business Media, 33–76. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05461-2_2
  5. Bose, R. P. J. C., van der Aalst, W. M. P., Zliobaite, I., Pechenizkiy, M. (2011). Handling Concept Drift in Process Mining. Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Springer Science + Business Media, 391–405. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21640-4_30
  6. Verbeek, H. M. W., Buijs, J. C. A. M., van Dongen, B. F., van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2011). XES, XESame, and ProM 6. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Springer Science + Business Media, 60–75. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17722-4_5
  7. Gunther, C. W. (2008). Process Mining in Flexible Environments. Berlin: Eindhoven University of Technology, 228.
  8. Günther, C. W., van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2007). Fuzzy Mining – Adaptive Process Simplification Based on Multi-perspective Metrics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Science + Business Media, 328–343. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-75183-0_24
  9. Popova, V., Sharpanskykh, A. (2009, September 19). Formal analysis of executions of organizational scenarios based on process-oriented specifications. Applied Intelligence, Vol. 34, № 2, 226–244. doi:10.1007/s10489-009-0192-9
  10. Van der Aalst, W. M. P., van Hee, K. M. (2002). Workflow Management: Models, Methods, and Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT press, 361.
  11. Utgoff, P. E. (1994). An Improved Algorithm for Incremental Induction of Decision Trees. Machine Learning Proceedings 1994. Elsevier BV, 318–325. doi:10.1016/b978-1-55860-335-6.50046-5

Published

2016-09-29

How to Cite

Чалый, С. Ф., & Левыкин, И. В. (2016). Identification of the standby intervals in the business processes based on analysis of the sequence of events. Technology Audit and Production Reserves, 5(2(31), 71–76. https://doi.org/10.15587/2312-8372.2016.80970