1. What’s the name of the game?
Hajo Reijers
What’s the name of the game?

2. Research Problem (1/2) ? Abstraction V V V ---------- ----------

3. Research Problem (2/2)
How can we (semi-)automatically find a suitable label for a given set of activities which are to collapsed into one single activity? ? V
Label Proposals
Conduct Planning
Perform Planning
Process Data
Perform Evaluation …

4. The team Henrik Leopold Humboldt zu Berlin Marcello La Rosa QUT
Jan Mendling
WU Wien

5. Analysis and Classification
Research Approach
Analysis and classification of existing abstraction labeling approaches:
SAP Reference Model (604)
IT Service Management (88)
Procurement (9)
Analysis and Classification
Approach
Development of semi- automated labeling approach:
Use identified strategies
Create a list of label proposals
Evaluation
Evaluation:
Semantic coverage
Workshop

6. Naming Approach: Dominating Business Object
Purchase Requisition Assignment
Purchase requisition created X
Source of supply assigned
Release
Purchase Requisition
Purchase requisition released for PO
Purchase
requisition released
Requisition released for agreement
Model Name:
Purchase Requisition

7. Naming Approach: Lexical Conjunction
Quotation to be created from inquiry
Customer inquires about products
Quotation must be created
Customer Quotation Processing
Customer Inquiry Processing
Resource-Related Quotation X
Customer project required
Model Name:
Customer Inquiry and Quotation Processing

8. Naming Approach: Main Activity
Future material price must be activated
Activate Future Material Price
Batch input has been created for price change
Model Name:
Change in Material Price
Change in Material Price V
Material price has been changed
Revaluation document has been created

9. Naming Approach: Event Naming
Dates must be planned for WBS elements
Cross-project scheduling required
Project/ subproject with activities requires scheduling
Model Name:
Perform Date
Planning
Manual WBS Date Planning
Overall Network Scheduling
Project Scheduling X
Date planning is performed

10. Naming Approach: Semantic Naming
Delivery for Returns
Returns already dispatched X
Returns to be collected V
Transfer order created
Goods Receipt posted
Material movement to be posted
Goods Receipt Processing for Returns
Model Name:
Shipping

11. Naming Approaches: Summary
Future Material Price must be activated
Start Event
Activate Future Material Price
Dominating Element
Material Price
Activate Future Material Price
Conjunction
Activate and Change Material Price
Batch input has been created for price change
Change in Material Price
Main Activity
Change Material Price V
Material price has been changed
Revaluation Document has been created
End Event
Create Revaluation Document
End Event
Change Material Price

12. Automated Labeling Approach
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Dominating Element Extraction
Annotation
Process Model
Subordinate Element Extraction
Label Repository

13. Automated Labeling Approach
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Dominating Element Extraction
Annotation
Process Model
Logical Conjunction
Subordinate Element Extraction
Lexical Conjunction
Refactoring
Label Proposal
List
Label Repository
Event Extraction
Main Activity Extraction

14. Evaluation Quantitative Qualitative Semantic closeness measure
Three process model collections
Comparison generated vs. real names
Qualitative
Human judgment
Four business experts, ten process model fragments
Inspection/discussion generated model names

15. Lin Measure
Lin, D. An information-theoretic definition of similarity. In Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Machine Learning, 296—304, 1998.

16. Semantic closeness
sc­gn = 1.00
Plan Costs

17. Semantic closeness
sc­gn = 0.51
Handle Purchase Requisition

18. Quantitative evaluation

19. Workshop
I found that some proposals were a bit of a miss, but it was because of the particular verb that was used to describe the particular process. For example 'manage' is a little bit broad, still the majority of the proposals were very appropriate.
It does depend on your exposure to that terminology before, because throughout my time in claims everybody has talked about 'handling a claim' so for me that one ['Manage Variations'] actually didn't go that far off.
It is a laborious exercise to read through the process model, so [this tool] provides a smart way of assessing what are the salient terms of a process.
If we could have 6-7 terms [name proposals] that would be very useful.

20. Conclusion Content: Process:
Complementary part process model abstraction
Heuristic approach
Not that bad
Process:
Started out without strong use case
Reviewer interaction
Replacement of evaluation
Team composition
Hajo Reijers