mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Control-flow anomaly detection by process mining-based feature extraction and dimensionality reduction

arXiv 2502.10211 ↗First posted 14 Feb 2025cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The business processes of organizations may deviate from normal control flow due to disruptive anomalies, including unknown, skipped, and wrongly-ordered activities. To identify these control-flow anomalies, process mining can check control-flow correctness against a reference process model through conformance checking, an explainable set of algorithms that allows linking any deviations with model elements. However, the effectiveness of conformance checking-based techniques is negatively affected by noisy event data and low-quality process models. To address these shortcomings and support the development of competitive and explainable conformance checking-based techniques for control-flow anomaly detection, we propose a novel process mining-based feature extraction approach with alignment-based conformance checking. This variant aligns the deviating control flow with a reference process model; the resulting alignment can be inspected to extract additional statistics such as the number of times a given activity caused mismatches. We integrate this approach into a flexible and explainable framework for developing techniques for control-flow anomaly detection. The framework combines process mining-based feature extraction and dimensionality reduction to handle high-dimensional feature sets, achieve detection effectiveness, and support explainability. The results show that the framework techniques implementing our approach outperform the baseline conformance checking-based techniques while maintaining the explainable nature of conformance checking. We also provide an explanation of why existing conformance checking-based techniques may be ineffective.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Feb 2025.

Builds on

11 of 52 references.

References · 11

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2021Feature Encoding with AutoEncoders for Weakly-supervised Anomaly Detectioncited by 42
  3. 2022A Survey on Explainable Anomaly Detectioncited by 39
  4. 2019Shapley Values of Reconstruction Errors of PCA for Explaining Anomaly Detectioncited by 19
  5. 2022ADMoE: Anomaly Detection with Mixture-of-Experts from Noisy Labelscited by 15
  6. 2019BINet: Multi-perspective Business Process Anomaly Classificationcited by 13
  7. 2018Analyzing Business Process Anomalies Using Autoencoderscited by 7
  8. 2023Trace Encoding in Process Mining: a survey and benchmarkingcited by 6
  9. 2020Recomposition vs. Prediction: A Novel Anomaly Detection for Discrete Events Based On Autoencodercited by 4
  10. 2019DeepAlign: Alignment-based Process Anomaly Correction using Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 3
  11. 2022Process Modeling and Conformance Checking in Healthcare: A COVID-19 Case Studycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

6 papers.