Information systems leave a traceable digital footprint whenever an action is executed. Business process modelers capture these digital traces to understand the behavior of a system, and to extract actual run-time models of those business processes. Despite the omnipresence of such traces, most organizations face substantial differences between the process specifications and the actual run-time behavior. Analyzing and implementing the results of systems that model business processes tend, however, to be difficult due to the inherent complexity of the models. Moreover, the observed reality in the form of lower-level real-time events, as recorded in event logs, is seldom solely explainable by higher-level process models. In this paper, we propose an architecture to model systemwide behavior by combining process mining with a multi-agent system. Digital traces, in the form of event logs, are used to iteratively mine process models from which agents can learn. The approach is initially applied to a case study of a simplified job-shop factory in which automated guided vehicles (AGVs) carry out transportation tasks. Numerical experiments show that the workflow of a process mining model can be used to enhance the agent-based system, particularly, in analyzing bottlenecks and improving decision-making.
Processes in organisations, such as hospitals, may deviate from the intended standard processes, due to unforeseeable events and the complexity of the organisation. For hospitals, the knowledge of actual patient streams for patient populations (e.g., severe or non-severe cases) is important for quality control and improvement. Process discovery from event data in electronic health records can shed light on the patient flows, but their comparison for different populations is cumbersome and time-consuming. In this paper, we present an approach for the automatic comparison of process models that were extracted from events in electronic health records. Concretely, we propose comparing processes for different patient populations by cross-log conformance checking, and standard graph similarity measures obtained from the directed graph underlying the process model. We perform a user study with 20 participants in order to obtain a ground truth for similarity of process models. We evaluate our approach on two data sets, the publicly available MIMIC database with the focus on different cancer patients in intensive care, and a database on breast cancer patients from a Dutch hospital. In our experiments, we found average fitness to be a good indicator for visual similarity in the ZGT use case, while the average precision and graph edit distance are strongly correlated with visual impression for cancer process models on MIMIC. These results are a call for further research and evaluation for determining which similarity or combination of similarities is needed in which type of process model comparison.
After a risk has manifested itself and has led to an accident, valuable lessons can be learned to reduce the risk of a similar accident occurring again. This calls for accident analysis methods. In the past 20 years, a large number of accident analysis methods have been proposed and it is difficult to find the right method to apply in a specific circumstance. The authors conducted a review of the state of the art of accident analysis methods and models across domains. They classify the models using the well-known categorization into sequential, epidemiological, and systemic methods. The authors find that these classes have their own characteristics in terms of speed of application versus pay-off. For optimum risk reduction, methods that take organizational issues into account can add valuable information to the risk management process in an organization.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.