business process developers

Abstract: Logic-based workflow patterns capture recurring behavioural structures together with reusable temporal specifications. Their composition raises distinct problems as workflow structures become richer, including instantiation, nesting, conditional execution, repeated occurrences, and traceability of generated formulae. This paper proposes a hierarchy of Pattern Composition ($ΠC$) procedures, from $ΠC_0$ to $ΠC_4$, that organizes these requirements as progressively richer compositional capabilities. The hierarchy separates compositional complexity from the expressive power of the temporal-logic fragment, represented by $TL_j$, yielding a framework $ΠC_i[TL_j]$ for developing logical workflow specifications. We develop activation-aware Pattern Composition ($ΠC_2$), which distinguishes the structural presence of a nested pattern from its execution in a particular workflow context. We formalise its recursive procedure, analyse its properties, and define an evaluation protocol for conditional activation, conservativity under mandatory composition, and specification growth. The hierarchy also characterizes selective occurrence qualification for iterative patterns ($ΠC_3$) and provenance for tracing generated formulae to their sources ($ΠC_4$). Finally, we outline $ΠC_{\mathrm{Assist}}$, an orthogonal mode in which AI proposes and refines pattern expressions subject to the hierarchy's compositional checks.

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), and AI agents are increasingly embedded in operational business processes. Yet Business Process Management (BPM) curricula and frameworks still largely treat artificial intelligence (AI) as an add-on technology, leaving graduates (as potential future process developers) unprepared to reason about AI as a first-class design element of end-to-end processes. This paper addresses that gap by proposing \emph{AI-decision checkpoints}: explicit moments in a process development trajectory where process developers identify AI-candidate sub-processes, assess expected effects on time, cost, quality, and flexibility, consider legal and organisational constraints, and document a reasoned decision to adopt, constrain, or reject specific AI components. The checkpoints are instantiated through a fictitious customer onboarding process as a \textit{BPM Teaching Case}, embedded in a lifecycle-driven framework spanning six modules that combine process modeling, simulation, workflow execution with AI agents, and process mining, with each module's output serving as the next module's input. A preliminary formative reflection draws on instructor observations, submitted artifacts, and discovered process maps from learning-management-system logs. These exploratory observations suggest that the approach supported clearer distinctions between task-level automation and process-level value.

Abstract: Run two process-discovery algorithms on the same event log and they return two different pictures of the same process. Petri nets, causal nets, process trees and BPMN each rely on routing machinery of their own, and their only common ground is the traces they generate. A trace lists activities one after another, so it discards the concurrency the notations exist to express, and two models with identical trace languages can describe genuinely different processes. Whether two discovered models mean the same thing therefore has no notation-independent answer. We show that all four notations admit one canonical presentation, a signature recording a model's activities and the typed interfaces along which they compose, and nothing of the routing machinery. Four construction theorems establish this presentation notation by notation, so two models are compared in a form that each notation determines on its own. Signature equality implies trace equivalence and is strictly finer, separating genuine concurrency from interleaved choice, which a trace comparison cannot, and signature inclusion implies trace inclusion. In a recovery study on one object-centric log, the discovered causal net has exactly the ground-truth signature, while the discovered Petri net's signature strictly contains it and locates every behaviour the Petri net adds in its silent structure. The gain is largest for object-centric data, where a single log supports several notations at once. The four notations become one calculus, in which a translation between them is a claim that can be checked.