TWINCLE : A Constrained Sequential Rule Mining Algorithm for Event Logs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Discovering workflow patterns in event-logs is important for many organizations to understand and optimize organizational processes. Although numerous algorithms have been proposed in the literature to discover patterns in sequences of symbols, most of them are inadequate to discover patterns in rich event-log data. In this paper, motivated by the analysis of patient pathways in the health domain, a rich type of event logs, called activity-cost event logs, is considered where each event is associated with a cost. The paper formalizes the problem of mining interesting low-cost patterns in these logs by combining novel concepts of penalties (activity costs) and consistency of patterns, with traditional measures of confidence, length, and time. Furthermore, to extract these patterns efficiently from event logs, an algorithm named TWINCLE (Time-WINdow, Cost and LEngth constrained sequential rule mining) is proposed. Experiments carried out on benchmark datasets and real-life healthcare event logs show that proposed algorithm is efficient and can discover interesting patterns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it