↓ Skip to main content

Detection and quantification of flow consistency in business process models

Overview of attention for article published in Software and Systems Modeling, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#48 of 721)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Detection and quantification of flow consistency in business process models
Published in
Software and Systems Modeling, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10270-017-0576-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Burattin, Vered Bernstein, Manuel Neurauter, Pnina Soffer, Barbara Weber

Abstract

Business process models abstract complex business processes by representing them as graphical models. Their layout, as determined by the modeler, may have an effect when these models are used. However, this effect is currently not fully understood. In order to systematically study this effect, a basic set of measurable key visual features is proposed, depicting the layout properties that are meaningful to the human user. The aim of this research is thus twofold: first, to empirically identify key visual features of business process models which are perceived as meaningful to the user and second, to show how such features can be quantified into computational metrics, which are applicable to business process models. We focus on one particular feature, consistency of flow direction, and show the challenges that arise when transforming it into a precise metric. We propose three different metrics addressing these challenges, each following a different view of flow consistency. We then report the results of an empirical evaluation, which indicates which metric is more effective in predicting the human perception of this feature. Moreover, two other automatic evaluations describing the performance and the computational capabilities of our metrics are reported as well.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Italy 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Lecturer 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 6 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 14 47%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 10%
Engineering 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2017.
All research outputs
#4,940,138
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Software and Systems Modeling
#48
of 721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,128
of 422,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Software and Systems Modeling
#3
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 721 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,203 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.