Skip to content
Off-topic for aiqbench

Off-topic for aiqbench

This story was gathered from a source we follow but falls outside AI and quantum coverage, so there is no aiqbench take for it.

Planning and Scheduling Business Processes under Control-Flow Uncertainty

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.05578v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scheduling activities in business processes can improve efficiency (e.g., reduce makespan), but is challenging because the exact sequence of activities required to complete a case is often uncertain due to decisions based on data that emerges during execution. Nevertheless, probabilistic information regarding such decisions can often be estimated or derived from historical execution logs, and can help anticipate which execution paths are likely to lead to successful completion. Planning with particular execution paths affects feasibility, i.e., the probability of successful completion, and the expected number of superfluous activities that are planned but never executed. We frame the problem as a chance-constrained optimization problem and present two formulations: A decomposed approach with two stages, a planning stage that minimizes the expected number of superfluous activities subject to a feasibility constraint, and a scheduling stage that minimizes the makespan over the planned activities; and an integrated approach that combines planning and scheduling into a single formulation. Evaluation on two real-world and one synthetic dataset shows that the integrated approach yields superior makespans but is intractable at scale, while the decomposed approach scales to large settings.

Abstract:Scheduling activities in business processes can improve efficiency (e.g., reduce makespan), but is challenging because the exact sequence of activities required to complete a case is often uncertain due to decisions based on data that emerges during execution. Nevertheless, probabilistic information regarding such decisions can often be estimated or derived from historical execution logs, and can help anticipate which execution paths are likely to lead to successful completion. Planning with particular execution paths affects feasibility, i.e., the probability of successful completion, and the expected number of superfluous activities that are planned but never executed. We frame the problem as a chance-constrained optimization problem and present two formulations: A decomposed approach with two stages, a planning stage that minimizes the expected number of superfluous activities subject to a feasibility constraint, and a scheduling stage that minimizes the makespan over the planned activities; and an integrated approach that combines planning and scheduling into a single formulation. Evaluation on two real-world and one synthetic dataset shows that the integrated approach yields superior makespans but is intractable at scale, while the decomposed approach scales to large settings.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2609.05578 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2609.05578v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.05578 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 277 words

Related coverage