Ambiguity Detection and Elimination in Automated Executable Process Modeling

Automated generation of executable Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models from natural-language specifications is increasingly enabled by large language models. However, ambiguous or underspecified text can yield structurally valid models with different simulated behavior. Our goal is not to prove that one generated BPMN model is semantically correct, but to detect when a natural-language specification fails to support a stable executable interpretation under repeated generation and simulation. We present a diagnosis-driven framework that detects behavioral inconsistency from the empirical distribution of key performance indicators (KPIs), localizes divergence to gateway logic using model-based diagnosis, maps that logic back to verbatim narrative segments, and repairs the source text through evidence-based refinement. Experiments on diabetic nephropathy health-guidance policies show that the method reduces variability in regenerated model behavior. The result is a closed-loop approach for validating and repairing executable process specifications in the absence of ground-truth BPMN models.

Automatic Generation of Executable BPMN Models from Medical Guidelines

We present an end-to-end pipeline that converts healthcare policy documents into executable, data-aware Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) models using large language models (LLMs) for simulation-based policy evaluation. We address the main challenges of automated policy digitization with four contributions: data-grounded BPMN generation with syntax auto-correction, executable augmentation, KPI instrumentation, and entropy-based uncertainty detection. We evaluate the pipeline on diabetic nephropathy prevention guidelines from three Japanese municipalities, generating 100 models per backend across three LLMs and executing each against 1,000 synthetic patients. On well-structured policies, the pipeline achieves a 100% ground-truth match with perfect per-patient decision agreement. Across all conditions, raw per-patient decision agreement exceeds 92%, and entropy scores increase monotonically with document complexity, confirming that the detector reliably separates unambiguous policies from those requiring targeted human clarification.