PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Assessing the performance of remaining time prediction methods for business processes.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Roider, J.* ; Nguyen, A.* ; Zanca, D.* ; Eskofier, B.M.

Assessing the performance of remaining time prediction methods for business processes.

IEEE Access 12, 130583-130601 (2024)

Publ. Version/Full Text

DOI

	Open Access Gold

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

The prediction of the remaining time for business processes is a major task in predictive process monitoring (PPM). In the last years, various machine learning methods were introduced which reduced error levels steadily. However, the commonly applied metric for optimization and evaluation, the Mean Absolute Error (MAE), has limitations regarding its interpretability. In this work we introduce and evaluate the normalized Mean Absolute Error (nMAE) as an interpretable metric for model evaluation. It accounts for different kinds of label shifts, which are a special type of concept drift that can distort remaining time results. We investigate these concepts in a thorough benchmark study and use them to assess the current state of remaining time prediction for business processes. This includes the evaluation of four different baseline models, identifying the most accurate one. Furthermore, our study compares three different state-of-The-Art methods, namely XGBoost, DA-LSTM, and PGT-Net. In contrary to prior studies we find that there is no significant difference in the performance between these models. Additionally, using the nMAE as evaluation metric we find that these models do not perform reasonably well on a range of event logs. Initial ideas for this behaviour are discussed and consolidated along with other findings from the case study into a comprehensive list motivating future research directions.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

3.400

0.000