The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automated Discovery of Process Models from Event Logs: Review and Benchmark
Open accessAbstract
Process mining allows analysts to exploit logs of historical executions of business processes to extract insights regarding the actual performance of these processes. One of the most widely studied process mining operations is automated process discovery. An automated process discovery method takes as input an event log, and produces as output a business process model that captures the control-flow relations between tasks that are observed in or implied by the event log. Various automated process discovery methods have been proposed in the past two decades, striking different tradeoffs between scalability, accuracy, and complexity of the resulting models. However, these methods have been evaluated in an ad-hoc manner, employing different datasets, experimental setups, evaluation measures, and baselines, often leading to incomparable conclusions and sometimes unreproducible results due to the use of closed datasets. This article provides a systematic review and comparative evaluation of automated process discovery methods, using an open-source benchmark and covering 12 publicly-available real-life event logs, 12 proprietary real-life event logs, and nine quality metrics. The results highlight gaps and unexplored tradeoffs in the field, including the lack of scalability of some methods and a strong divergence in their performance with respect to the different quality metrics used.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection
Kohavi, R. (1995) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19712698 · Cited by 10,909
(2004) · Cited by 5,198
Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples
Torraco, R. J. (2005) · Human Resource Development Review · doi:10.1177/1534484305278283 · Cited by 3,534 · cited 1×
“ch. Given that [3] refers to studies published prior to 2012, our search returned a large number of publications not covered in [3]. 2.3 Study selection As a last step, as suggested by [5], [6], [7], [8], we defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure an unbiased selection of relevant studies (to be retained, a…”
InfluentialWorkflow mining: discovering process models from event logs
van der Aalst, W., Weijters, T., & Maruster, L. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2004.47 · Cited by 2,203
Conducting research literature reviews: from the Internet to paper
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-6198 · Cited by 1,854
A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research
Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2011) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1954824 · Cited by 1,849
van der Aalst, W. (2016) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49851-4 · Cited by 866
A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review
Randolph, J. (2020) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/b0az-8t74 · Cited by 722
DECLARE: Full Support for Loosely-Structured Processes
Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., & van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2007) · 11th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2007) · doi:10.1109/edoc.2007.14 · Cited by 561
Genetic process mining: an experimental evaluation
de Medeiros, A. K. A., Weijters, A. J. M. M., & van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2007) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-006-0061-7 · Cited by 490
Metadata
- Authors
- Augusto, A., Conforti, R., Dumas, M., Rosa, M. L., Maggi, F. M., Marrella, A., Mecella, M., & Soo, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
- Published
- 2019-04-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 686-705
- ISSN
- 1041-4347 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2191
- 2326-3865
- OpenAlex
- W2613062404
- Cited by
- 438
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 67.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated Discovery of Process Models from Event Logs: Review and Benchmark. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tkde.2018.2841877
- The paper
- Augusto, A., Conforti, R., Dumas, M., Rosa, M. L., Maggi, F. M., Marrella, A., Mecella, M., & Soo, A. (2019). Automated Discovery of Process Models from Event Logs: Review and Benchmark. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tkde.2018.2841877
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.