pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.13053 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-17 · 💻 cs.DB

Detecting Dynamic Relationships in Object-Centric Event Logs

Alessandro Gianola , Zeeshan Hameed , Marco Montali , Anjo Seidel , Mathias Weske , Sarah Winkler This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 09:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.DB
keywords object-centric event logsdynamic relationshipsprocess miningOCELassumptionssemantic unambiguityevent logs
0
0 comments X

The pith

Assumptions allow unambiguous representation of dynamic relationships in object-centric event logs.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Object-centric process mining studies processes involving multiple co-evolving objects, but existing event logs often leave dynamic relationships between objects underspecified, creating potential ambiguity in how these relationships change over time. This paper identifies and formally defines a set of assumptions for the first time that enable representing and manipulating these dynamic relationships in a semantically clear manner. A sympathetic reader would care because clear semantics would allow more reliable analysis and mining of complex processes where objects interact and evolve, such as in supply chains or service systems. The paper supports this by evaluating the assumptions against existing real-world logs, showing they are frequently satisfied.

Core claim

The central discovery is the identification and formal definition of assumptions that permit the representation and manipulation of dynamic relationships in object-centric event logs (OCELs) in a way that is semantically unambiguous. Evaluation on existing logs demonstrates that these assumptions hold sufficiently often to provide full transparency of relationship semantics.

What carries the argument

The formally defined assumptions on dynamic relationships in OCELs, which ensure that time-varying connections between objects can be handled without semantic ambiguity.

Load-bearing premise

The defined assumptions are satisfied in a sufficient number of real OCELs to make relationship semantics transparent.

What would settle it

A real-world OCEL where dynamic object relationships lead to ambiguous semantics under the defined assumptions.

read the original abstract

Object-centric process mining examines how processes interact with multiple co-evolving objects, and has gained great interest in recent years. However, object-centric event logs (OCELs) leave object relationships underspecified in several respects, especially if relationships are dynamic, i.e., they change over time. In this paper, we identify and formally define for the first time assumptions that allow to represent and manipulate dynamic relationships in OCELs in a semantically unambiguous way. We evaluate existing logs to show that our assumptions are often satisfied, ensuring full transparency of relationship semantics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to identify and formally define, for the first time, assumptions that enable semantically unambiguous representation and manipulation of dynamic relationships in object-centric event logs (OCELs). It supplies the formalization and reports an evaluation on existing logs showing that the assumptions are often satisfied, thereby ensuring full transparency of relationship semantics.

Significance. If the definitions are internally consistent and the assumptions hold with the frequency reported, the work supplies a foundational methodological contribution to object-centric process mining. By clarifying previously underspecified dynamic relationships, it can improve the reliability of downstream analyses such as process discovery and conformance checking that involve co-evolving objects. The combination of formal definitions with empirical checks on real logs is a strength.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Evaluation] The evaluation section should explicitly state the selection criteria for the existing logs and report quantitative metrics (e.g., percentage of relationships satisfying each assumption) rather than the qualitative statement that assumptions are 'often satisfied'.
  2. [§3] The formal definitions would benefit from one or two concrete running examples showing how a dynamic relationship is represented before and after applying the assumptions, to aid reader comprehension.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our contribution and the recommendation for minor revision. The referee's summary correctly reflects the paper's focus on formally defining assumptions for unambiguous handling of dynamic relationships in OCELs, along with the empirical evaluation. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation of prior OCEL work; central claim is definitional and self-contained

full rationale

The paper's core contribution is the identification and formal definition of assumptions enabling unambiguous representation of dynamic relationships in OCELs. This is presented as a new formalization rather than a derivation from equations or data fits. Evaluation on existing logs is offered as empirical support that the assumptions hold sufficiently often, without statistical prediction or parameter fitting that would create circularity. A minor self-citation to earlier OCEL literature appears but is not load-bearing for the main argument, as the new definitions and transparency claims stand on their own formal content. No self-definitional reductions, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, uniqueness theorems imported from the same authors, or ansatz smuggling are present in the described structure.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard assumptions from process mining and event log semantics; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Object-centric event logs can be extended with dynamic relationship semantics under the defined assumptions without loss of generality.
    Invoked in the identification of assumptions for unambiguous representation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5392 in / 977 out tokens · 22134 ms · 2026-05-15T09:48:34.801156+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    In: Proc

    Armstrong, W.W.: Dependency structures of data base relationships. In: Proc. IFIP Congress (1974)

    work page 1974

  2. [2]

    In: Proc

    Artale, A., Kovtunova, A., Montali, M., Van Der Aalst, W.M.P.: Modeling and Reasoning over Declarative Data-Aware Processes with Object-Centric Behavioral Constraints. In: Proc. 17th BPM, LNCS, vol. 11675, pp. 139–156. Springer (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Berti, A., et al.: OCEL (Object-Centric Event Log) 2.0 Specification (2024)

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    In: Proc

    Chaki, R., Calvanese, D., Montali, M.: Generation of timelines from event knowl- edge graphs using domain knowledge. In: Proc. 24th CISIM. LNCS, vol. 15927, pp. 275–289 (2025)

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    In: Proc

    Fahland, D.: Describing Behavior of Processes with Many-to-Many Interactions. In: Proc. 40th PETRINETS. LNCS, vol. 11522, pp. 3–24. Springer (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Fahland, D.: Process Mining over Multiple Behavioral Dimensions with Event Knowledge Graphs, LNBIP, vol. 448. Cham (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Towards a simple and extensible standard for object-centric event data (oced)–core model, design space, and lessons learned

    Fahland, D., Montali, M., Lebherz, J., van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Asseldonk, M., Blank, P., Bosmans, L., Brenscheidt, M., Ciccio, C.D., Delgado, A., Calegari, D., Peeperkorn, J., Verbeek, E., Vugs, L., Wynn, M.T.: Towards a simple and extensible standard for object-centric event data (OCED) - core model, design space, and lessons learned. CoRRabs/2410.14495(2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    In: Proc

    Ghahfarokhi, A.F., et al.: OCEL: A Standard for Object-Centric Event Logs. In: Proc. ADBIS 2021. pp. 169–175. Springer (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    In: Proc

    Gianola, A., Montali, M., Winkler, S.: Object-Centric Conformance Alignments with Synchronization. In: Proc. 36th CAiSE. LNCS, vol. 14663, pp. 3–19 (2024)

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    In: Proc

    Liss, L., Adams, J.N., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: TOTeM: Temporal Object Type Model for Object-Centric Process Mining. In: Proc. BPM Forum. pp. 107–123. Springer (2024)

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    In: Proc

    Seidel, A., Winkler, S., Gianola, A., Montali, M., Weske, M.: To bind or not to bind? Discovering stable relationships in object-centric processes. In: Proc. 44th ER. LNCS, vol. 16189, pp. 223–241 (2025)

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    In: Software Engineering and Formal Methods

    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Object-Centric Process Mining: Dealing with Divergence and Convergence in Event Data. In: Software Engineering and Formal Methods. pp. 3–25. Springer (2019)

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    In: Proc

    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Toward more realistic simulation models using object- centric process mining. In: Proc. 37th ECMS. pp. 5–13 (2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    In: Proc

    van der Aalst, W.M.P., et al.: Process Mining Manifesto. In: Proc. BPM Work- shops. Springer (2012)

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    Funda- menta Informaticae175(1-4), 1–40 (2020)

    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Berti, A.: Discovering Object-centric Petri Nets. Funda- menta Informaticae175(1-4), 1–40 (2020)

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    In: Proc

    van Detten, J.N., Schumacher, P., Leemans, S.: Modeling and discovering dynamic identity relations in object-centric process mining. In: Proc. 7th ICPM (2025)

    work page 2025