mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluating the Ability of LLMs to Solve Semantics-Aware Process Mining Tasks

arXiv 2407.02310 ↗First posted 2 Jul 2024cs.CLcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The process mining community has recently recognized the potential of large language models (LLMs) for tackling various process mining tasks. Initial studies report the capability of LLMs to support process analysis and even, to some extent, that they are able to reason about how processes work. This latter property suggests that LLMs could also be used to tackle process mining tasks that benefit from an understanding of process behavior. Examples of such tasks include (semantic) anomaly detection and next activity prediction, which both involve considerations of the meaning of activities and their inter-relations. In this paper, we investigate the capabilities of LLMs to tackle such semantics-aware process mining tasks. Furthermore, whereas most works on the intersection of LLMs and process mining only focus on testing these models out of the box, we provide a more principled investigation of the utility of LLMs for process mining, including their ability to obtain process mining knowledge post-hoc by means of in-context learning and supervised fine-tuning. Concretely, we define three process mining tasks that benefit from an understanding of process semantics and provide extensive benchmarking datasets for each of them. Our evaluation experiments reveal that (1) LLMs fail to solve challenging process mining tasks out of the box and when provided only a handful of in-context examples, (2) but they yield strong performance when fine-tuned for these tasks, consistently surpassing smaller, encoder-based language models.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2024.

Builds on

19 of 31 references.

References · 19

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  5. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  6. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  7. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  8. 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,308
  9. 2022Super-NaturalInstructions: Generalization via Declarative Instructions on 1600+ NLP Taskscited by 858
  10. 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 651
  11. 2023Instruction Tuning for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 617
  12. 2016Predicting Process Behaviour using Deep Learningcited by 59
7 more
  1. 2023Large Language Models can accomplish Business Process Management Taskscited by 34
  2. 2021A systematic literature review on state-of-the-art deep learning methods for process predictioncited by 32
  3. 2024Process Modeling With Large Language Modelscited by 26
  4. 2023Abstractions, Scenarios, and Prompt Definitions for Process Mining with LLMs: A Case Studycited by 20
  5. 2022SAP Signavio Academic Models: A Large Process Model Datasetcited by 11
  6. 2023Chit-Chat or Deep Talk: Prompt Engineering for Process Miningcited by 9
  7. 2021Multivariate Business Process Representation Learning utilizing Gramian Angular Fields and Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 7; 2026: 6.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area: