Business Process Modeling

Process model forecasting (PMF) aims to predict the process model that will characterize a future period, thereby providing a process-level view of how behavior is expected to evolve. Existing PMF methods, however, forecast directly-follows graphs, which cannot explicitly represent concurrency. We extend PMF to causal nets by forecasting time series of relation and binding counts and using these forecasts to reconstruct future process models with AND/XOR semantics. To evaluate the resulting models, we introduce a protocol that accounts for partial traces and constructs the workflow nets required for conformance checking. Experiments on four event logs show that the forecasted models achieve conformance levels close to those of models re-mined from observations in the corresponding future windows. They also outperform static discovery baselines, which retain high precision on the structurally stable log but exhibit substantial precision losses on the other three logs. Filtering infrequent bindings improves most conformance metrics, although it also removes much of the concurrent behavior captured by the models.

Conversational AI systems, such as chatbots and virtual assistants, are becoming increasingly important to digital business processes. However, the established Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) standard faces challenges when representing dynamic, context-sensitive interactions. This paper addresses this methodological and practical research gap by developing a standard-compliant BPMN extension (BPMN4CAI). Using Design Science Research methodology, this paper develops an approach that systematically extends existing BPMN elements and incorporates specialized components. The applicability and relevance of the BPMN4CAI framework are demonstrated and evaluated through a case study. The results show that the BPMN4CAI extension facilitates adaptive decision-making processes, robust context management, and transparent interactions for Conversational AI within business processes.

The modelling and analysis of secure business processes require the incorporation of security annotations into process models. Although BPMN extensions, including SecBPMN2, exist for this purpose, the derivation of accurate and complete security annotations from natural-language specifications remains a manual, expert-intensive, and error-prone task. This paper presents a hybrid framework that takes a BPMN process model and a security requirements document as input and automatically generates security annotations adhering to the SecBPMN2 specification. The approach combines Large Language Model (LLM)--based semantic extraction with schema-constrained mapping, rule-based normalization, and deterministic validation. The framework is evaluated comprehensively on a curated dataset of 27 process models from various domains. The results indicate that it consistently produces structurally valid SecBPMN2 annotations with high schema completeness. Compared to human security analysts, the system achieves substantially higher precision (0.58 vs. 0.29) while maintaining comparable recall (0.52 vs. 0.50) and reduces erroneous or misplaced annotations by nearly 50%. In addition, annotation generation is significantly faster than manual annotation. These findings demonstrate that hybrid LLM- and rule-based automation can reduce modeling effort while improving consistency and reliability, thereby providing a scalable foundation for security-by-design BPM.

Enterprise nets and Industry nets are specific Petri net models that together form a framework for the modelling of collaborating business processes and the specification of interactions between them. In this set-up, individual business process are modelled as Enterprise nets, while Industry nets consist of Enterprise nets that interact by exchanging messages through unidirectional channels. In previous contributions (see [21,22]), it was established how to leverage algorithms for the discovery of single processes (modelled as Enterprise nets) from event logs (consisting of finite sequences of executed actions), to synthesise systems consisting of asynchronously communicating processes (modelled as Industry nets). However, in general, it may be difficult to work with event logs from different organisations or even get access to them. Recordings of message exchanges between processes may be easier available.Therefore, we focus in this paper on the communications between different processes and turn to the investigation of message logs, \ie collections of recordings of communications in the form of message exchanges (output and input events) between two processes. In particular, the question is addressed of how a message log can be transformed into a description of the communication behaviour in the form of an event log such that the causal order on message events is preserved. Following the approach from [21,22], this event log can then be used to synthesis an Industry net.

Large language models (LLMs) can generate BPMN process models from natural-language descriptions, yet supervised fine-tuning (SFT) limits their output quality to the patterns present in the training data. Reinforcement learning (RL) can optimize beyond this ceiling using external quality measures, but how the reward function should be designed when quality is multi-dimensional remains unexplored. We present a systematic investigation of reward function design for RL-based process model generation, training two LLM families (Llama3.1 8B, Qwen2.5 14B) under 48 configurations using Group Sequence Policy Optimization with rewards derived from an automated evaluation framework comprising 38 metrics across syntactic, pragmatic, and semantic quality. Three findings emerge. First, RL significantly improves pragmatic and syntactic quality while preserving semantic fidelity, reducing output variability by more than sixfold. Second, equal reward weighting consistently outperforms targeted weighting: emphasizing a specific dimension fails to improve it and can collapse the model into a low-quality mode. Third, design choices interact with model architecture in non-trivial ways: the invalidity penalty is essential for one model but irrelevant for the other, and SFT initialization is indispensable for one architecture but counterproductive for another. These results demonstrate that reward composition is a primary determinant of optimization outcomes, with effects as large as the decision to apply RL itself. The findings generalize to any structured generation task where quality is assessed along multiple automated dimensions. We release our implementation and experimental code at https://github.com/chlauer99/RL_for_process_modeling.

Agentic AI opens new opportunities for automating Business Process (BP), enabling autonomous decision-making and dynamic adaptation. However, realising this potential requires BP entities and their interactions to be defined with formal precision. This paper presents a formal framework for Agentic BP analysis through the AGO methodology. AGO captures the modelling perspective in terms of who is acting (Agents), why it is carried out (Goals), and what the relevant entities are (Objects). Grounded in set theory and mathematical logic, we formally define the AGO entity types and their interactions, organising all definitions into a BP Knowledge Base (BPKB). The resulting BPKB supports structured querying, incremental updates, and automatic generation of BP workflows, while ensuring soundness and completeness of the derived paths.

Process modeling is a sub-domain of Business Process Management (BPM) focused on the translation of process artifacts into formal models. This task traditionally requires extensive human input and domain expertise in both BPM notations and the specific business context. While Large Language Models (LLMs) can now automate much of this manual work, current text-to-model approaches focus predominantly on the control-flow perspective-ordering activities without considering the collaborative aspect of the processes. In this paper, we introduce a resource-aware generation pipeline that produces formal BPMN 2.0 collaboration diagrams from natural-language descriptions. Rather than solely prompting an LLM for raw XML, we describe a compact, executable intermediate language with mandatory resource details defining both the organization (pool) and the role (lane). Cross-organization dependencies are materialized using the standard formal notation for such interactions-message events-while an orthogonal layout routine automatically handles the spatial arrangement of elements within pools and lanes. Experiments on ten business processes with nine LLMs show strong resource discovery while preserving control-flow quality and adding only marginal runtime overhead. This approach moves generative modeling toward a more comprehensive, multi-collaborative representation of business operations.

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has significantly transformed tasks across Software Engineering. In the context of Business Process Management, LLMs are now being explored as tools to derive process models directly from textual descriptions. Existing approaches range from chatbot-driven systems that assist with iterative, text-based modeling to fully automated end-to-end modeling assistants. However, we argue that process modeling is inherently complex and cannot be effectively addressed through black-box solutions. Instead, we envision modeling as an open-ended conversational activity, best supported by an interactive, iterative process involving both humans and LLM. In our approach, the modeling task is decomposed into smaller, manageable steps. Each step results in intermediate artifacts and explicitly documents the rationale behind each modeling decision. During this process, we incrementally uncover simple behavioral relations that guide the construction of the model. Given the current limitations of LLMs in reasoning about complex dependencies, we complement them with specialized tools developed in the field to structure process models based on behavioral relations. This hybrid approach enables the generation of sound, yet comprehensible models that evolve through transparent and explainable steps. In this paper, we present our research agenda and introduce Pragmos, a prototype system that operationalizes this vision. Pragmos demonstrates how LLMs can collaborate with human users as both domain and modeling experts to co-create evolving process models through a structured and explainable workflow.

Which tasks inside an enterprise workflow can a large-language-model agent reliably handle, and under what conditions? Most business process modeling frameworks still answer this at the activity level, even though a single activity can bundle work of radically different difficulty. This paper takes the analysis a step smaller. We describe two design artifacts developed in a financial-services IT setting: T-IPO, which represents each task as an eight-element tuple, and LARA (LLM Agent Readiness Assessment), a five-dimension rubric that scores a task's readiness for agent substitution. Compliance Sensitivity carries $1.5\times$ weight, a value we fixed through a three-round Delphi study and cross-checked with AHP. The rubric produces four levels, L1 to L4, and applies a floor rule so that a task with maximum compliance load cannot be classified below L3 no matter what the other scores say. Both artifacts sit inside a larger methodology (PARTIS) that we map onto BWW ontology in Section 3. We evaluate the instruments across 127 tasks. Inter-rater agreement reaches Fleiss' $κ= 0.80$; a replication at three further institutions returns $κ= 0.73$. A controlled comparison against activity-level assessment suggests, though does not prove, an improvement in predictive utility at the task level. Pilot deployment of 120 task instances confirms that auto-completion decays monotonically from $95\%$ at L1 through about $70\%$ at L2 to about $40\%$ at L3. Exploratory factor analysis points to a two-factor structure: task readiness seems to be determined jointly by cognitive-execution complexity and governance-compliance intensity. We close with a recalibration procedure (LARA-TCA) so the rubric can keep pace with evolving LLM capabilities.

Recent advances in Generative Artificial Intelligence, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), have stimulated growing interest in automating or assisting Business Process Modeling tasks using natural language. Several approaches have been proposed to transform textual process descriptions into BPMN and related workflow models. However, the extent to which these approaches effectively support complex process modeling in organizational settings remains unclear. This article presents a literature review of AI-driven methods for transforming natural language into BPMN process models, with a particular focus on the role of LLMs. Following a structured review strategy, relevant studies were identified and analyzed to classify existing approaches, examine how LLMs are integrated into text-to-model pipelines, and investigate the evaluation practices used to assess generated models. The analysis reveals a clear shift from rule-based and traditional NLP pipelines toward LLM-based architectures that rely on prompt engineering, intermediate representations, and iterative refinement mechanisms. While these approaches significantly expand the capabilities of automated process model generation, the literature also exposes persistent challenges related to semantic correctness, evaluation fragmentation, reproducibility, and limited validation in real-world organizational contexts. Based on these findings, this review identifies key research gaps and discusses promising directions for future research, including the integration of contextual knowledge through Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), its integration with LLMs, the development of interactive modeling architectures, and the need for more comprehensive and standardized evaluation frameworks.

Automated generation of executable Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models from natural-language specifications is increasingly enabled by large language models. However, ambiguous or underspecified text can yield structurally valid models with different simulated behavior. Our goal is not to prove that one generated BPMN model is semantically correct, but to detect when a natural-language specification fails to support a stable executable interpretation under repeated generation and simulation. We present a diagnosis-driven framework that detects behavioral inconsistency from the empirical distribution of key performance indicators (KPIs), localizes divergence to gateway logic using model-based diagnosis, maps that logic back to verbatim narrative segments, and repairs the source text through evidence-based refinement. Experiments on diabetic nephropathy health-guidance policies show that the method reduces variability in regenerated model behavior. The result is a closed-loop approach for validating and repairing executable process specifications in the absence of ground-truth BPMN models.

We present an end-to-end pipeline that converts healthcare policy documents into executable, data-aware Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models using large language models (LLMs) for simulation-based policy evaluation. We address the main challenges of automated policy digitization with four contributions: data-grounded BPMN generation with syntax auto-correction, executable augmentation, KPI instrumentation, and entropy-based uncertainty detection. We evaluate the pipeline on diabetic nephropathy prevention guidelines from three Japanese municipalities, generating 100 models per backend across three LLMs and executing each against 1,000 synthetic patients. On well-structured policies, the pipeline achieves a 100% ground-truth match with perfect per-patient decision agreement. Across all conditions, raw per-patient decision agreement exceeds 92%, and entropy scores increase monotonically with document complexity, confirming that the detector reliably separates unambiguous policies from those requiring targeted human clarification.

Synchronizing decisions between running cases in business processes facilitates fair and efficient use of resources, helps prioritize the most valuable cases, and prevents unnecessary waiting. Consequently, decision synchronization patterns are regularly built into processes, in the form of mechanisms that temporarily delay one case to favor another. These decision mechanisms therefore consider properties of multiple cases at once, rather than just the properties of a single case; an aspect that is rarely addressed by current process discovery techniques. To address this gap, this paper proposes an approach for discovering decision synchronization patterns inspired by supply chain processes. These decision synchronization patterns take the form of specific process constructs combined with a constraint that determines which particular case to execute. We describe, formalize and demonstrate how the constraint for four such patterns can be discovered. We evaluate our approach in two artificial scenarios. First, with four separate process models each containing a single decision synchronization pattern, i.e., we demonstrate that our approach can discover every type of pattern when only this one type is present. Second, we consider a process model containing all four decision synchronization patterns to show generalizability of the approach to more complex problems. For both scenarios, we could reliably retrieve the expected patterns.

Integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into business process management tools promises to democratize Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) modeling for non-experts. While automated frameworks assess syntactic and semantic quality, they miss human factors like trust, usability, and professional alignment. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of our proposed solution, an LLM-powered BPMN copilot, with five process modeling experts using focus groups and standardized questionnaires. Our findings reveal a critical tension between acceptable perceived usability (mean CUQ score: 67.2/100) and notably lower trust (mean score: 48.8%), with reliability rated as the most critical concern (M=1.8/5). Furthermore, we identified output-quality issues, prompting difficulties, and a need for the LLM to ask more in-depth clarifying questions about the process. We envision five use cases ranging from domain-expert support to enterprise quality assurance. We demonstrate the necessity of human-centered evaluation complementing automated benchmarking for LLM modeling agents.

The creation of Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models is a complex and time-consuming task requiring both domain knowledge and proficiency in modeling conventions. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have significantly expanded the possibilities for generating BPMN models directly from natural language, building upon earlier text-to-process methods with enhanced capabilities in handling complex descriptions. However, there is a lack of systematic evaluations of LLM-generated process models. Current efforts either use LLM-as-a-judge approaches or do not consider established dimensions of model quality. To this end, we introduce BEF4LLM, a novel LLM evaluation framework comprising four perspectives: syntactic quality, pragmatic quality, semantic quality, and validity. Using BEF4LLM, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of open-source LLMs and benchmark their performance against human modeling experts. Results indicate that LLMs excel in syntactic and pragmatic quality, while humans outperform LLMs in semantic aspects; however, the differences in scores are relatively modest, highlighting LLMs' competitive potential despite challenges in validity and semantic quality. The insights highlight current strengths and limitations of using LLMs for BPMN modeling and guide future model development and fine-tuning. Addressing these areas is essential for advancing the practical deployment of LLMs in business process modeling.

Extracting structured procedural knowledge from unstructured business documents is a critical yet unresolved bottleneck in process automation. While prior work has focused on extracting linear action flows from instructional texts, such as recipes, it has insufficiently addressed the complex logical structures, including conditional branching and parallel execution, that are pervasive in real-world regulatory and administrative documents. Furthermore, existing benchmarks are limited by simplistic schemas and shallow logical dependencies, restricting progress toward logic-aware large language models.To bridge this Logic Gap, we introduce BREX, a carefully curated benchmark comprising 409 real-world business documents and 2,855 expert-annotated rules. Unlike prior datasets centered on narrow service scenarios, BREX spans over 30 vertical domains, covering scientific, industrial, administrative, and financial regulations. We further propose ExIde, a structure-aware reasoning framework that investigates five distinct prompting strategies, ranging from implicit semantic alignment to executable grounding via pseudo-code generation. This enables explicit modeling of rule dependencies and provides an out-of-the-box framework for different business customers without finetuning their own large language models. We benchmark ExIde using 13 state-of-the-art large language models. Our extensive evaluation reveals that executable grounding serves as a superior inductive bias, significantly outperforming standard prompts in rule extraction. In addition, reasoning-optimized models demonstrate a distinct advantage in tracing long-range and non-linear rule dependencies compared to standard instruction-tuned models.