@article {2022:sosym:bpmn,
	title = {Live process modeling with the BPMN Sketch Miner},
	journal = {Software and Systems Modeling},
	volume = {21},
	year = {2022},
	month = {October},
	pages = {1877{\textendash}1906},
	abstract = {BPMN Sketch Miner is a modeling environment for generating visual business process models starting from constrained natural language textual input. Its purpose is to support business process modelers who need to rapidly sketch visual BPMN models during interviews and design workshops, where participants should not only provide input but also give feedback on whether the sketched visual model represents accurately what has been described during the discussion. In this article, we present a detailed description of the BPMN Sketch Miner design decisions and list the different control flow patterns supported by the current version of its textual DSL. We also summarize the user study and survey results originally published in MODELS 2020 concerning the tool usability and learnability and present a new performance evaluation regarding the visual model generation pipeline under actual usage conditions. The goal is to determine whether it can support a rapid model editing cycle, with live synchronization between the textual description and the visual model. This study is based on a benchmark including a large number of models (1350 models) exported by users of the tool during the year 2020. The main results indicate that the performance is sufficient for a smooth live modeling user experience and that the end-to-end execution time of the text-to-model-to-visual pipeline grows linearly with the model size, up to the largest models (with 195 lines of textual description) found in the benchmark workload.},
	keywords = {BPMN, text to visual, Textual Modelling DSL},
	issn = {1619-1366},
	doi = {10.1007/s10270-022-01009-w},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10270-022-01009-w$\#$citeas},
	author = {Ana Ivanchikj and Souhaila Serbout and Cesare Pautasso}
}
@conference {2020:bpmn-sketch-miner:models,
	title = {From Text to Visual BPMN Process Models: Design and Evaluation},
	booktitle = {23rd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS)},
	year = {2020},
	month = {October},
	pages = {229{\textendash}239},
	publisher = {ACM/IEEE},
	organization = {ACM/IEEE},
	address = {Montreal, Canada},
	abstract = {Most existing Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) editing tools are graphical, and as such based on explicit modeling, requiring good knowledge of the notation and its semantics, as well as the ability to analyze and abstract business requirements and capture them by correctly using the notation. As a consequence, their use can be cumbersome for live modeling during interviews and design workshops, where participants should not only provide input but also give feedback on how it has been represented in a model. To overcome this, in this paper we present the design and evaluation of BPMN Sketch Miner, a tool which combines notes taking in constrained natural language with process mining to automatically produce BPMN diagrams in real time as interview participants describe them with stories. In this work we discuss the design decisions regarding the trade-off between using mining vs. modelling in order to: 1) support a larger number of BPMN constructs in the textual language; 2) target both BPMN beginners and business analysts, in addition to the process participants themselves. The evaluation of the new version of the tool in terms of how it balances the expressiveness and learnability of its DSL with the usability of the text-to-visual sketching environment shows encouraging results. Namely while BPMN beginners could model a non-trivial process with the tool in a relatively short time and with good accuracy, business analysts appreciated the usability of the tool and the expressiveness of the language in terms of supported BPMN constructs.},
	keywords = {BPMN, domain specific languages, live modeling, text to visual},
	doi = {10.1145/3365438.3410990},
	author = {Ana Ivanchikj and Souhaila Serbout and Cesare Pautasso}
}
@proceedings {2017:benchflow:bpmds,
	title = {Performance Comparison Between BPMN 2.0 Workflow Management Systems Versions},
	year = {2017},
	month = {June},
	publisher = {Springer},
	address = {Essen, Germany},
	abstract = {Software has become a rapidly evolving artifact and Workflow Management Systems (WfMSs) are not an exception. WfMSs{\textquoteright} changes may impact key performance indicators or resource consumption levels may change among different versions. Thus, users considering a WfMS upgrade need to evaluate the extent of such changes for frequently issued workload.  Deriving such information requires running performance experiments with appropriate workloads. 
In this paper, we propose a novel method for deriving a structurally representative workload from a given business process collection, which we later use to evaluate the performance and resource consumption over four versions of two open-source WfMSs, for different numbers of simulated users. In our case study scenario the results reveal relevant variations in the WfMSs{\textquoteright} performance and resource consumption, indicating a decrease in performance for newer versions.},
	keywords = {BenchFlow, BPMN, Performance Regression, Performance Testing, workflow engine, Workflow Management Systems},
	author = {Vincenzo Ferme and Marigianna Skouradaki and Ana Ivanchikj and Cesare Pautasso and Frank Leymann}
}
@conference {benchflow:2017:bpm,
	title = {On the Performance Overhead of BPMN Modeling Practices},
	booktitle = {15th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM2017)},
	year = {2017},
	month = {September},
	pages = {216--232},
	publisher = {Springer},
	organization = {Springer},
	address = {Barcelona, Spain},
	abstract = {Business process models can serve different purposes, from discussion and analysis among stakeholders, to simulation and execution. 
While work has been done on deriving modeling guidelines to improve understandability, it remains to be determined how different modeling practices impact the execution of the models. 
In this paper we observe how semantically equivalent, but syntactically different, models behave in order to assess the performance impact of different modeling practices. 
To do so, we propose a methodology for systematically deriving semantically equivalent models by applying a set of model transformation rules and for precisely measuring their execution performance. 
We apply the methodology on three scenarios to systematically explore the performance variability of 16 different versions of parallel, exclusive, and inclusive control flows. 
Our experiments with two open-source business process management systems measure the execution duration of each model{\textquoteright}s instances. 
The results reveal statistically different execution performance when applying different modeling practices without total ordering of performance ranks.
},
	keywords = {BenchFlow, BPMN, performance},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-65000-5_13},
	author = {Ana Ivanchikj and Vincenzo Ferme and Cesare Pautasso}
}
@demo {benchflow:2015:bpmeter,
	title = {BPMeter: Web Service and Application for Static Analysis of BPMN 2.0 Collections},
	year = {2015},
	month = {August},
	pages = {30-34},
	publisher = {Springer},
	address = {Innsbruck, Austria},
	abstract = {The number of business process models is constantly increasing as companies realize the competitive advantage of managing their processes. Measuring their size and structural properties can give useful insights. With the BPMeter tool, process owners can quickly compare their process with company{\textquoteright}s process portfolio, researchers can statically analyze a process to see which modeling language features have been used in practice, while modelers can obtain an aggregated view over their processes. In this demonstration we show how to use BPMeter, which provides a simple Web application to visualize the results of applying over 100 different size and structure metrics to BPMN 2.0 process models. The visualization features measurements, statistics and the possibility to compare the measurements with the ones obtained from the entire portfolio. Moreover we show how to invoke its RESTful Web API so that the BPMeter analyzer can be easily integrated with existing process management tools.},
	keywords = {BenchFlow, BPMN, Workflow Static Analysis},
	author = {Ana Ivanchikj and Vincenzo Ferme and Cesare Pautasso}
}
@conference {benchflow:2015:bpm,
	title = {A Framework for Benchmarking BPMN 2.0 Workflow Management Systems},
	booktitle = {13th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2015)},
	year = {2015},
	month = {August},
	publisher = {Springer},
	organization = {Springer},
	address = {Innsbruck, Austria},
	keywords = {BenchFlow, BPMN, Workflow Benchmarking},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-23063-4_18},
	author = {Vincenzo Ferme and Ana Ivanchikj and Cesare Pautasso}
}
