Timotheus Kampik

Diego Calvanese, Angelo Casciani, Giuseppe De Giacomo et al. · oxford

This paper presents a manifesto that articulates the conceptual foundations of Agentic Business Process Management (APM), an extension of Business Process Management (BPM) for governing autonomous agents executing processes in organizations. From a management perspective, APM represents a paradigm shift from the traditional process view of the business process, driven by the realization of process awareness and an agent-oriented abstraction, where software and human agents act as primary functional entities that perceive, reason, and act within explicit process frames. This perspective marks a shift from traditional, automation-oriented BPM toward systems in which autonomy is constrained, aligned, and made operational through process awareness. We introduce the core abstractions and architectural elements required to realize APM systems and elaborate on four key capabilities that such APM agents must support: framed autonomy, explainability, conversational actionability, and self-modification. These capabilities jointly ensure that agents' goals are aligned with organizational goals and that agents behave in a framed yet proactive manner in pursuing those goals. We discuss the extent to which the capabilities can be realized and identify research challenges whose resolution requires further advances in BPM, AI, and multi-agent systems. The manifesto thus serves as a roadmap for bridging these communities and for guiding the development of APM systems in practice.

Nataliia Klievtsova, Janik-Vasily Benzin, Timotheus Kampik et al.

AI-driven chatbots such as ChatGPT have caused a tremendous hype lately. For BPM applications, several applications for AI-driven chatbots have been identified to be promising to generate business value, including explanation of process mining outcomes and preparation of input data. However, a systematic analysis of chatbots for their support of conversational process modeling as a process-oriented capability is missing. This work aims at closing this gap by providing a systematic analysis of existing chatbots. Application scenarios are identified along the process life cycle. Then a systematic literature review on conversational process modeling is performed, resulting in a taxonomy of application scenarios for conversational process modeling, including paraphrasing and improvement of process descriptions. In addition, this work suggests and applies an evaluation method for the output of AI-driven chatbots with respect to completeness and correctness of the process models. This method consists of a set of KPIs on a test set, a set of prompts for task and control flow extraction, as well as a survey with users. Based on the literature and the evaluation, recommendations for the usage (practical implications) and further development (research directions) of conversational process modeling are derived.

Julian Alfredo Mendez, Timotheus Kampik

This paper presents the AR fairness metamodel, aimed at formally representing, analyzing, and comparing fairness scenarios. The metamodel provides an abstract representation of fairness, enabling the formal definition of fairness notions. We instantiate the metamodel through several examples, with a particular focus on comparing the notions of equity and equality. We use the Tiles framework, which offers modular components that can be interconnected to represent various definitions of fairness. Its primary objective is to support the operationalization of AR-based fairness definitions in a range of scenarios, providing a robust method for defining, comparing, and evaluating fairness. Tiles has an open-source implementation for fairness modeling and evaluation.

Andrea Aler Tubella, Dimitri Coelho Mollo, Adam Dahlgren Lindström et al.

Fairness is central to the ethical and responsible development and use of AI systems, with a large number of frameworks and formal notions of algorithmic fairness being available. However, many of the fairness solutions proposed revolve around technical considerations and not the needs of and consequences for the most impacted communities. We therefore want to take the focus away from definitions and allow for the inclusion of societal and relational aspects to represent how the effects of AI systems impact and are experienced by individuals and social groups. In this paper, we do this by means of proposing the ACROCPoLis framework to represent allocation processes with a modeling emphasis on fairness aspects. The framework provides a shared vocabulary in which the factors relevant to fairness assessments for different situations and procedures are made explicit, as well as their interrelationships. This enables us to compare analogous situations, to highlight the differences in dissimilar situations, and to capture differing interpretations of the same situation by different stakeholders.

Lukas Kirchdorfer, Robert Blümel, Timotheus Kampik et al.

Business process simulation (BPS) is a versatile technique for estimating process performance across various scenarios. Traditionally, BPS approaches employ a control-flow-first perspective by enriching a process model with simulation parameters. Although such approaches can mimic the behavior of centrally orchestrated processes, such as those supported by workflow systems, current control-flow-first approaches cannot faithfully capture the dynamics of real-world processes that involve distinct resource behavior and decentralized decision-making. Recognizing this issue, this paper introduces AgentSimulator, a resource-first BPS approach that discovers a multi-agent system from an event log, modeling distinct resource behaviors and interaction patterns to simulate the underlying process. Our experiments show that AgentSimulator achieves state-of-the-art simulation accuracy with significantly lower computation times than existing approaches while providing high interpretability and adaptability to different types of process-execution scenarios.

Arunavo Ganguly, Julian Alfredo Mendez, Timotheus Kampik

We introduce notions of safety, liveness, and fairness, as commonly used in temporal reasoning, to quantitative (bipolar) argumentation dialogues where repeated inferences are drawn from argumentation graphs with weighted nodes. Between inferences, these graphs undergo updates. Strong and weak safety capture that arguments' (final) strengths remain above a specific threshold of justification and always reach the threshold eventually, respectively. Liveness requires that arguments' strengths fluctuate across the threshold of justification. Fairness notions assess how safe arguments are spread within a sequence of argumentation graphs. We formally show how these notions are related, and discuss some analytical challenges with respect to providing general guarantees for our properties.

Giuseppe De Giacomo, Timotheus Kampik, Lukas Kirchdorfer et al.

Just like traditional BPM systems, agentic BPM systems are built around a specification of the process under consideration. Their distinguishing feature, however, is that the execution of the process is driven by multiple autonomous decision-makers, referred to as agents. Since such agents cannot be fully controlled, the process specification is augmented with explicit objectives, or goals, assigned to the participating agents. Agents then pursue these goals, at least to the best of their efforts, under suitable assumptions on the behavior of others, by adopting appropriate strategies. Centrally, the organization enacting the process can use these specifications to provide guardrails on the decision-making capabilities of agents at the strategy level. This paper sets up the mathematical foundations of such systems in three key settings and analyzes four foundational problems of agentic BPM.

Filip Naudot, Tobias Sundqvist, Timotheus Kampik

Feature attribution methods help make machine learning-based inference explainable by determining how much one or several features have contributed to a model's output. A particularly popular attribution method is based on the Shapley value from cooperative game theory, a measure that guarantees the satisfaction of several desirable principles, assuming deterministic inference. We apply the Shapley value to feature attribution in large language model (LLM)-based decision support systems, where inference is, by design, stochastic (non-deterministic). We then demonstrate when we can and cannot guarantee Shapley value principle satisfaction across different implementation variants applied to LLM-based decision support, and analyze how the stochastic nature of LLMs affects these guarantees. We also highlight trade-offs between explainable inference speed, agreement with exact Shapley value attributions, and principle attainment.

Timotheus Kampik, Kristijonas Čyras, José Ruiz Alarcón

This paper presents a formal approach to explaining change of inference in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs). When drawing conclusions from a QBAF and updating the QBAF to then again draw conclusions (and so on), our approach traces changes -- which we call strength inconsistencies -- in the partial order over argument strengths that a semantics establishes on some arguments of interest, called topic arguments. We trace the causes of strength inconsistencies to specific arguments, which then serve as explanations. We identify sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations for strength inconsistencies and show that strength inconsistency explanations exist if and only if an update leads to strength inconsistency. We define a heuristic-based approach to facilitate the search for strength inconsistency explanations, for which we also provide an implementation.

Harleen Kaur, Jan Mendling, Christoffer Rubensson et al.

A key concern of automatic process discovery is to provide insights into performance aspects of business processes. Waiting times are of particular importance in this context. For that reason, it is surprising that current techniques for automatic process discovery generate directly-follows graphs and comparable process models, but often miss the opportunity to explicitly represent the time axis. In this paper, we present an approach for automatically constructing process models that explicitly align with a time axis. We exemplify our approach for directly-follows graphs. Our evaluation using two BPIC datasets and a proprietary dataset highlight the benefits of this representation in comparison to standard layout techniques.

Xiang Yin, Nico Potyka, Antonio Rago et al.

Contestable AI requires that AI-driven decisions align with human preferences. While various forms of argumentation have been shown to support contestability, Edge-Weighted Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (EW-QBAFs) have received little attention. In this work, we show how EW-QBAFs can be deployed for this purpose. Specifically, we introduce the contestability problem for EW-QBAFs, which asks how to modify edge weights (e.g., preferences) to achieve a desired strength for a specific argument of interest (i.e., a topic argument). To address this problem, we propose gradient-based relation attribution explanations (G-RAEs), which quantify the sensitivity of the topic argument's strength to changes in individual edge weights, thus providing interpretable guidance for weight adjustments towards contestability. Building on G-RAEs, we develop an iterative algorithm that progressively adjusts the edge weights to attain the desired strength. We evaluate our approach experimentally on synthetic EW-QBAFs that simulate the structural characteristics of personalised recommender systems and multi-layer perceptrons, and demonstrate that it can solve the problem effectively.

Nataliia Klievtsova, Timotheus Kampik, Juergen Mangler et al.

With the recent success of large language models (LLMs), the idea of AI-augmented Business Process Management systems is becoming more feasible. One of their essential characteristics is the ability to be conversationally actionable, allowing humans to interact with the LLM effectively to perform crucial process life cycle tasks such as process model design and redesign. However, most current research focuses on single-prompt execution and evaluation of results, rather than on continuous interaction between the user and the LLM. In this work, we aim to explore the feasibility of using LLMs to empower domain experts in the creation and redesign of process models in an iterative and effective way. The proposed conversational process model redesign (CPD) approach receives as input a process model and a redesign request by the user in natural language. Instead of just letting the LLM make changes, the LLM is employed to (a) identify process change patterns from literature, (b) re-phrase the change request to be aligned with an expected wording for the identified pattern (i.e., the meaning), and then to (c) apply the meaning of the change to the process model. This multi-step approach allows for explainable and reproducible changes. In order to ensure the feasibility of the CPD approach, and to find out how well the patterns from literature can be handled by the LLM, we performed an extensive evaluation. The results show that some patterns are hard to understand by LLMs and by users. Within the scope of the study, we demonstrated that users need support to describe the changes clearly. Overall the evaluation shows that the LLMs can handle most changes well according to a set of completeness and correctness criteria.

Julian Alfredo Mendez, Timotheus Kampik

This paper presents the Soda language for verifying multi-agent systems. Soda is a high-level functional and object-oriented language that supports the compilation of its code not only to Scala, a strongly statically typed high-level programming language, but also to Lean, a proof assistant and programming language. Given these capabilities, Soda can implement multi-agent systems, or parts thereof, that can then be integrated into a mainstream software ecosystem on the one hand and formally verified with state-of-the-art tools on the other hand. We provide a brief and informal introduction to Soda and the aforementioned interoperability capabilities, as well as a simple demonstration of how interaction protocols can be designed and verified with Soda. In the course of the demonstration, we highlight challenges with respect to real-world applicability.

Timotheus Kampik, Juan Carlos Nieves

In cooperative human decision-making, agreements are often not total; a partial degree of agreement is sufficient to commit to a decision and move on, as long as one is somewhat confident that the involved parties are likely to stand by their commitment in the future, given no drastic unexpected changes. In this paper, we introduce the notion of agreement scenarios that allow artificial autonomous agents to reach such agreements, using formal models of argumentation, in particular abstract argumentation and value-based argumentation. We introduce the notions of degrees of satisfaction and (minimum, mean, and median) agreement, as well as a measure of the impact a value in a value-based argumentation framework has on these notions. We then analyze how degrees of agreement are affected when agreement scenarios are expanded with new information, to shed light on the reliability of partial agreements in dynamic scenarios. An implementation of the introduced concepts is provided as part of an argumentation-based reasoning software library.

Filip Naudot, Andreas Brännström, Vicenç Torra et al.

We present functions that quantify the contribution of a set of arguments in quantitative bipolar argumentation graphs to (the final strength of) an argument of interest, a so-called topic. Our set contribution functions are generalizations of existing functions that quantify the contribution of a single contributing argument to a topic. Accordingly, we generalize existing contribution function principles for set contribution functions and provide a corresponding principle-based analysis. We introduce new principles specific to set-based functions that focus on properties pertaining to the interaction of arguments within a set. Finally, we sketch how the principles play out across different set contribution functions given a recommendation system application scenario.

Kiran Busch, Timotheus Kampik, Henrik Leopold

The identification of undesirable behavior in event logs is an important aspect of process mining that is often addressed by anomaly detection methods. Traditional anomaly detection methods tend to focus on statistically rare behavior and neglect the subtle difference between rarity and undesirability. The introduction of semantic anomaly detection has opened a promising avenue by identifying semantically deviant behavior. This work addresses a gap in semantic anomaly detection, which typically indicates the occurrence of an anomaly without explaining the nature of the anomaly. We propose xSemAD, an approach that uses a sequence-to-sequence model to go beyond pure identification and provides extended explanations. In essence, our approach learns constraints from a given process model repository and then checks whether these constraints hold in the considered event log. This approach not only helps understand the specifics of the undesired behavior, but also facilitates targeted corrective actions. Our experiments demonstrate that our approach outperforms existing state-of-the-art semantic anomaly detection methods.

Timotheus Kampik, Nico Potyka, Xiang Yin et al.

We present a principle-based analysis of contribution functions for quantitative bipolar argumentation graphs that quantify the contribution of one argument to another. The introduced principles formalise the intuitions underlying different contribution functions as well as expectations one would have regarding the behaviour of contribution functions in general. As none of the covered contribution functions satisfies all principles, our analysis can serve as a tool that enables the selection of the most suitable function based on the requirements of a given use case.

Timotheus Kampik, Christian Warmuth, Adrian Rebmann et al.

The continued success of Large Language Models (LLMs) and other generative artificial intelligence approaches highlights the advantages that large information corpora can have over rigidly defined symbolic models, but also serves as a proof-point of the challenges that purely statistics-based approaches have in terms of safety and trustworthiness. As a framework for contextualizing the potential, as well as the limitations of LLMs and other foundation model-based technologies, we propose the concept of a Large Process Model (LPM) that combines the correlation power of LLMs with the analytical precision and reliability of knowledge-based systems and automated reasoning approaches. LPMs are envisioned to directly utilize the wealth of process management experience that experts have accumulated, as well as process performance data of organizations with diverse characteristics, e.g.,\ regarding size, region, or industry. In this vision, the proposed LPM would allow organizations to receive context-specific (tailored) process and other business models, analytical deep-dives, and improvement recommendations. As such, they would allow to substantially decrease the time and effort required for business transformation, while also allowing for deeper, more impactful, and more actionable insights than previously possible. We argue that implementing an LPM is feasible, but also highlight limitations and research challenges that need to be solved to implement particular aspects of the LPM vision.

Timotheus Kampik, Adnane Mansour, Olivier Boissier et al.

The study of autonomous agents has a long tradition in the Multiagent Systems and the Semantic Web communities, with applications ranging from automating business processes to personal assistants. More recently, the Web of Things (WoT), which is an extension of the Internet of Things (IoT) with metadata expressed in Web standards, and its community provide further motivation for pushing the autonomous agents research agenda forward. Although representing and reasoning about norms, policies and preferences is crucial to ensuring that autonomous agents act in a manner that satisfies stakeholder requirements, normative concepts, policies and preferences have yet to be considered as first-class abstractions in Web-based multiagent systems. Towards this end, this paper motivates the need for alignment and joint research across the Multiagent Systems, Semantic Web, and WoT communities, introduces a conceptual framework for governance of autonomous agents on the Web, and identifies several research challenges and opportunities.

Timotheus Kampik, Mathias Weske

This paper presents the results of an industry expert survey about event log generation in process mining. It takes academic assumptions as a starting point and elicits practitioner's assessments of statements about process execution, process scoping, process discovery, and process analysis. The results of the survey shed some light on challenges and perspectives around event log generation, as well as on the relationship between process models and process execution, and derive challenges for event log generation from it. The responses indicate that particularly relevant challenges exist around data integration and quality, and that process mining can benefit from a systematic integration with more traditional and wide-spread business intelligence approaches.

OHAAI Collaboration, Andreas Brannstrom, Federico Castagna et al.

This volume contains revised versions of the papers selected for the second volume of the Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI (OHAAI). Previously, formal theories of argument and argument interaction have been proposed and studied, and this has led to the more recent study of computational models of argument. Argumentation, as a field within artificial intelligence (AI), is highly relevant for researchers interested in symbolic representations of knowledge and defeasible reasoning. The purpose of this handbook is to provide an open access and curated anthology for the argumentation research community. OHAAI is designed to serve as a research hub to keep track of the latest and upcoming PhD-driven research on the theory and application of argumentation in all areas related to AI.

OHAAI Collaboration, Federico Castagna, Timotheus Kampik et al.

This volume contains revised versions of the papers selected for the first volume of the Online Handbook of Argumentation for AI (OHAAI). Previously, formal theories of argument and argument interaction have been proposed and studied, and this has led to the more recent study of computational models of argument. Argumentation, as a field within artificial intelligence (AI), is highly relevant for researchers interested in symbolic representations of knowledge and defeasible reasoning. The purpose of this handbook is to provide an open access and curated anthology for the argumentation research community. OHAAI is designed to serve as a research hub to keep track of the latest and upcoming PhD-driven research on the theory and application of argumentation in all areas related to AI.

Timotheus Kampik, Juan Carlos Nieves

A multitude of agent-oriented software engineering frameworks exist, most of which are developed by the academic multi-agent systems community. However, these frameworks often impose programming paradigms on their users that are challenging to learn for engineers who are used to modern high-level programming languages such as JavaScript and Python. To show how the adoption of agent-oriented programming by the software engineering mainstream can be facilitated, we provide a lean JavaScript library prototype for implementing reasoning-loop agents. The library focuses on core agent programming concepts and refrains from imposing further restrictions on the programming approach. To illustrate its usefulness, we show how the library can be applied to multi-agent systems simulations on the web, deployed to cloud-hosted function-as-a-service environments, and embedded in Python-based data science tools.

Timotheus Kampik, Juan Carlos Nieves

Abstract argumentation has emerged as a method for non-monotonic reasoning that has gained popularity in the symbolic artificial intelligence community. In the literature, the different approaches to abstract argumentation that were refined over the years are typically evaluated from a formal logics perspective; an analysis that is based on models of economically rational decision-making does not exist. In this paper, we work towards addressing this issue by analyzing abstract argumentation from the perspective of the rational man paradigm in microeconomic theory. To assess under which conditions abstract argumentation-based decision-making can be considered economically rational, we derive reference independence as a non-monotonic inference property from a formal model of economic rationality and create a new argumentation principle that ensures compliance with this property. We then compare the reference independence principle with other reasoning principles, in particular with cautious monotony and rational monotony. We show that the argumentation semantics as proposed in Dung's seminal paper, as well as other semantics we evaluate -- with the exception of naive semantics and the SCC-recursive CF2 semantics -- violate the reference independence principle. Consequently, we investigate how structural properties of argumentation frameworks impact the reference independence principle, and identify cyclic expansions (both even and odd cycles) as the root of the problem. Finally, we put reference independence into the context of preference-based argumentation and show that for this argumentation variant, which explicitly models preferences, reference independence cannot be ensured in a straight-forward manner.

Yazan Mualla, Amro Najjar, Timotheus Kampik et al.

This paper presents an initial design concept and specification of a civilian Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) management simulation system that focuses on explainability for the human-in-the-loop control of semi-autonomous UAVs. The goal of the system is to facilitate the operator intervention in critical scenarios (e.g. avoid safety issues or financial risks). Explainability is supported via user-friendly abstractions on Belief-Desire-Intention agents. To evaluate the effectiveness of the system, a human-computer interaction study is proposed.