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

July 30, 2026 ยท Grace Period ยท ๐Ÿ› ECML PKDD 2026 Workshops

โณ Grace Period
This paper is less than 90 days old. We give authors time to release their code before passing judgment.
Authors Lennart Fertig, Lukas Kirchdorfer, Tobias Sesterhenn arXiv ID 2607.27797 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Citations 0 Venue ECML PKDD 2026 Workshops
Abstract
Predictive process monitoring (PPM) leverages event logs to forecast the future of running process instances, for instance, predicting the next activity, the remaining time until case completion, or the time to the next event. While PPM research in recent years has been dominated by deep sequence models trained from scratch, such as Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) models, foundation-model approaches---particularly large language models (LLMs)---are increasingly explored for PPM. At the same time, tabular foundation models with in-context learning capabilities offer a promising alternative but have not yet been systematically benchmarked for PPM. Thus, it remains unclear whether classical sequence-based models remain competitive in this evolving landscape. This paper compares the three modeling paradigms both conceptually and empirically through a controlled benchmark across multiple datasets and prediction tasks. The results show that sequence models consistently perform best for next activity prediction, whereas tabular foundation models are competitive on temporal tasks, with LLMs usually lagging behind despite higher cost.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning