Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

PM-LLM-Benchmark: Evaluating Large Language Models on Process Mining Tasks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2407.13244 v1 pith:RKUUGUES submitted 2024-07-18 cs.CL cs.DB

PM-LLM-Benchmark: Evaluating Large Language Models on Process Mining Tasks

classification cs.CL cs.DB
keywords llmstasksminingmodelsprocessbenchmarkadequatebiases
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have the potential to semi-automate some process mining (PM) analyses. While commercial models are already adequate for many analytics tasks, the competitive level of open-source LLMs in PM tasks is unknown. In this paper, we propose PM-LLM-Benchmark, the first comprehensive benchmark for PM focusing on domain knowledge (process-mining-specific and process-specific) and on different implementation strategies. We focus also on the challenges in creating such a benchmark, related to the public availability of the data and on evaluation biases by the LLMs. Overall, we observe that most of the considered LLMs can perform some process mining tasks at a satisfactory level, but tiny models that would run on edge devices are still inadequate. We also conclude that while the proposed benchmark is useful for identifying LLMs that are adequate for process mining tasks, further research is needed to overcome the evaluation biases and perform a more thorough ranking of the competitive LLMs.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Beyond Generalist LLMs: Specialist Agentic Systems for Structured Code Workflow Execution

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    A specialist BPMN-to-agent pipeline beats general-purpose coding agents on tool-use accuracy, latency, and token cost for deterministic business workflows.

  2. Revisiting Predictive Process Monitoring in the Age of Foundation Models: A Comparative Study of Sequence, Tabular, and LLM Approaches

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    On five business-process logs, trained-from-scratch sequence models beat fine-tuned LLMs and tabular foundation models at next-activity prediction, while tabular models are competitive for remaining-time and next-even...