Predictive Process Monitoring explores decentralized event data dynamics in cyber-physical systems, suggesting new modeling techniques.
Process mining extracts actionable insights from event data recorded by information systems [Aa16; ARM24]. Building on these foundations, Predictive Process Monitoring (PPM) uses historical logs to forecast future process states from partial traces, including next activities, outcomes, or remaining time [AIM+25; GPR+25]. Most existing approaches assume a centralized data source and full process observability. This assumption increasingly breaks in cyber-physical systems (CPS), where event data is fragmented across autonomous components and constrained by privacy requirements, organizational boundaries, communication limits, heterogeneous schemas, and partial observability [Br25; Li23]. Distributed and federated process mining address this challenge [Aa21; An25; LGT+25]. However, local data in CPS is typically Non-Independent and Identically Distributed (non-IID), adding further challenges: In CPS, each component produces a diverse set of activities. Depending on the current observed cases, the activity sets between two different components may be the same, overlapping, or very different. As a result, a single global model trained on global data may dilute activity-specific regularities, whereas purely local models may lack global context. This motivates the question: how can we devise accurate predictive models when event data must remain decentralized?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tran et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: