Remaining cycle time prediction with Graph Neural Networks for Predictive Process Monitoring

被引:2
作者
Le Toan Duong [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Trave-Massuyes, Louise [1 ,2 ]
Subias, Audine [1 ,2 ]
Merle, Christophe [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Toulouse, LAAS, INSA, CNRS, Toulouse, France
[2] Univ Fed Toulouse Midi Pyrenees, ANITI, Toulouse, France
[3] Vitesco Technol France SAS, Toulouse, France
来源
PROCEEDINGS OF 2023 8TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MACHINE LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES, ICMLT 2023 | 2023年
关键词
Predictive process monitoring; Remaining cycle time prediction; Machine learning; Graph neural networks;
D O I
10.1145/3589883.3589897
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Predictive process monitoring is at the intersection of machine learning and process mining. This subfield of process mining leverages historical data generated from process executions to make predictions about the ongoing process. One of the predictive process monitoring tasks with high interest is predicting the remaining cycle time of process instances. Recently, deep neural networks, particularly long short-term memory, have attracted much attention due to their ability to learn relevant features automatically and predict with high accuracy. While these models require data defined in the Euclidean space, graph neural networks have the advantage of handling data that can be represented as graphs. This paper proposes the use of graph neural network models to predict the remaining cycle time, which has not yet been studied in the literature. The proposed models are evaluated on real-life event logs and compared to a state-of-the-art long short-term memory model. The results show that graph neural network models can improve prediction accuracy, particularly for complex processes.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 101
页数:7
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [11] Harane Nitin, 2020, COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY, P115, DOI [10.1007/978-3-030-38445-6_9, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-38445-6_9]
  • [12] Machine Learning in Business Process Monitoring: A Comparison of Deep Learning and Classical Approaches Used for Outcome Prediction
    Kratsch, Wolfgang
    Manderscheid, Jonas
    Roglinger, Maximilian
    Seyfried, Johannes
    [J]. BUSINESS & INFORMATION SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, 2021, 63 (03) : 261 - 276
  • [13] Li Y., 2015, ARXIV151105493
  • [14] Comparing and Combining Predictive Business Process Monitoring Techniques
    Metzger, Andreas
    Leitner, Philipp
    Ivanovic, Dragan
    Schmieders, Eric
    Franklin, Rod
    Carro, Manuel
    Dustdar, Schahram
    Pohl, Klaus
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS MAN CYBERNETICS-SYSTEMS, 2015, 45 (02): : 276 - 290
  • [15] Navarin N, 2017, 2017 IEEE SYMPOSIUM SERIES ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (SSCI), P3474
  • [16] A systematic literature review on state-of-the-art deep learning methods for process prediction
    Neu, Dominic A.
    Lahann, Johannes
    Fettke, Peter
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE REVIEW, 2022, 55 (02) : 801 - 827
  • [17] Philipp P, 2019, INT CONF SOFT COMP, P73, DOI [10.1109/ISCMI47871.2019.9004296, 10.1109/iscmi47871.2019.9004296]
  • [18] Polato M, 2017, DATASET BELONGING HE, V1, DOI [10.4121/uuid:0c60-df1-6f83-4-75-9367-4c63b3e9d5bb, DOI 10.4121/UUID:0C60-DF1-6F83-4-75-9367-4C63B3E9D5BB]
  • [19] Time and activity sequence prediction of business process instances
    Polato, Mirko
    Sperduti, Alessandro
    Burattin, Andrea
    de Leoni, Massimiliano
    [J]. COMPUTING, 2018, 100 (09) : 1005 - 1031
  • [20] Polato M, 2014, IEEE IJCNN, P816, DOI 10.1109/IJCNN.2014.6889360