Resolution limits for process comparison from event data
Abstract
One hospital runs bloods and imaging at the same time. Another runs them one after the other, in either order, equally often. Knowing which actually happened, and how it is recorded in data, is critical for all operational managers. In process mining, the standard approach is to construct an event log, and attempt to discover concurrent and sequential processes in a data-driven way. We show this standard approach, built on the stochastic language of an event log, reports only the assumptions of its discovery algorithm, because every such log is explained equally well by a model with no concurrency at all. Further, before any data is acquired, we characterise when data can and cannot distinguish concurrent behaviour. Where it cannot, the distinction is recoverable from evidence the stochastic language discards, such as the times at which activities start and end, or object-centric records that fix an order within an execution. The remedy is therefore a choice of what is recorded, rather than a larger sample. This impacts decision making, as planning resource for truly concurrent services is very different from sequential services.
Related
- Testing Gaussian process with applications to super-resolution
- Conditional Stable Laws and Rare-Event Limits for Absorbing Markov Chains
- Hydrodynamic limits of the asymmetric Brownian energy process and its dynamic generalization
- Spectral comparison on Specht modules and mixing of the interchange process
- Scaling Limits of Density Fluctuation Fields of the Symmetric Partial Exclusion Processes Approaching the Zero Range Process
BibTeX
@misc{lee2026resolution,
title = {{Resolution limits for process comparison from event data}},
author = {Antony R. Lee and Peter Tiňo and Iain B. Styles},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2609.20489},
eprint = {2609.20489},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.20489},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Resolution limits for process comparison from event data
AU - Antony R. Lee
AU - Peter Tiňo
AU - Iain B. Styles
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/17
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2609.20489
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.20489
AB - One hospital runs bloods and imaging at the same time. Another runs them one after the other, in either order, equally often. Knowing which actually happened, and how it is recorded in data, is critical for all operational managers. In process mining, the standard approach is to construct an event log, and attempt to discover concurrent and sequential processes in a data-driven way. We show this standard approach, built on the stochastic language of an event log, reports only the assumptions of its discovery algorithm, because every such log is explained equally well by a model with no concurrency at all. Further, before any data is acquired, we characterise when data can and cannot distinguish concurrent behaviour. Where it cannot, the distinction is recoverable from evidence the stochastic language discards, such as the times at which activities start and end, or object-centric records that fix an order within an execution. The remedy is therefore a choice of what is recorded, rather than a larger sample. This impacts decision making, as planning resource for truly concurrent services is very different from sequential services.
ER -