Page 194 -
P. 194

176                                 6  Advanced Process Discovery Techniques

            Fig. 6.13 Transition system
            TS L 1 ,l 2 state ()  derived from L 1
            using l state (σ,k) = tl |σ|−k (σ)
                2







            Fig. 6.14 Transition system
            TS L 1 ,l  state  ()  derived from L 1
                3
            using l state  (σ,k) =
                3
                   k
            ∂ multiset (hd (σ))





              Using state representation function l state (), we obtain transition system TS  state
                                           2                            L 1 ,l 2  ()
            showninFig. 6.13. In this transition system, there are three initial states and only
            one final state, because this abstraction uses the future rather than the past. Con-
            sider, for example, a case with trace σ = a,e,d . Initially, the case is in state
            l state (σ,0) = a,e,d , i.e., all three activities still need to occur. After executing a,
            2
            the case is in state l state (σ,1) = e,d . After executing e state l state (σ,2) = d  is
                            2                                  2
            reached. Executing the last event d results in state l state (σ,3) =   .
                                                     2
              Transition system TS  state  is showninFig. 6.14. Here, the states are repre-
                               L 1 ,l 3  ()
            sented by the multi-sets of activities that have been executed before. For instance,
            l state ( a,b,c,d ,3) =[a,b,c]. Because there are no repeated activities TS  state
            3                                                           L 1 ,l 4  ()
            is identical to TS L 1 ,l 3 state apart from the naming of states, e.g., l state ( a,b,c,d ,3) =
                              ()
                                                             4
            {a,b,c} rather than [a,b,c].
              The sets of traces allowed by the three transition systems shown in Figs. 6.12,
            6.13, and 6.14 are the same:  a,b,c,d ,  a,c,b,d ,  a,e,d . This is not always the
            case. Add, for example, the trace  a,c,b,f,f   to L 1 . In this case, TS L 1 ,l 4 state allows
                                                                       ()
            for traces  a,b,c,f,f   and  a,c,b,f,f,f,f,f  , i.e., b and c may be swapped
            and any number of f events is allowed at the end. TS L 1 ,l state ()  allows for traces
                                                            3
             a,b,c,f,f   and  a,c,b,f,f  , but not  a,c,b,f,f,f,f,f  . TS L 1 ,l state ()  allows
                                                                    1
            for trace  a,c,b,f,f  , but not  a,b,c,f,f  . Since l 4 state () provides a coarser ab-
            straction than l state (), it generalizes more.
                        1
              The state representation functions mentioned thus far are just examples. Depend-
            ing on the desired abstraction, another state representation function can be defined.
            The essential question is whether partially executed cases are considered to be in the
            same state or not. For instance, if we assume that only the last activity matters, we
                                                         k
                                                     1
            can use state representation function l state (σ,k) = tl (hd (σ)). This results in tran-
                                          5
            sition system TS L 1 ,l state ()  shown in Fig. 6.15. Now, states in the transition system are
                           5
   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199