Every category where a model named ProM for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant	Since September 2026
Process mining	IT operations and endpoint	2%	14 of 61	33%	15	criticized challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for ProM yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated ProM across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	1	0	0	1
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	0	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1	2
Kimi K2	0	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	1	1
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	1	0	0	1

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase0 labelsNone

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained10 labels1

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative13 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative27 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“If you have no budget at all and internal technical resources: Start with ProM or Apromore Community Edition.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Process mining · budget prompt · first choice

“Some of the tools that are mentioned as alternatives or comparisons to the above-mentioned tools include ProM, which is an open-source software maintained with Java and has platform independence.” Llama 4 Maverick · Process mining · negative prompt · alternative

“Free open-source desktop tool with extensive plugins... but dated interface and needs technical expertise” Grok 4.1 Fast · Process mining · budget prompt · alternative

“ProM is the academic gold standard for process mining. It is a free, Java-based open-source application” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Process mining · budget prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“Avoid Academic or Open-Source Tools (e.g., ProM) for Production Use” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Process mining · negative prompt · hard negative

“Open Source Tools (Avoid if You Don't Have Developers)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Process mining · negative prompt · hard negative

“Tools that are hard to use or research-oriented, such as ProM in many comparisons, which is powerful but often criticized for UI and ease-of-use issues.” Perplexity Sonar · Process mining · negative prompt · soft negative

“Academic-focused, steep learning curve, not designed for enterprise production use” Kimi K2 · Process mining · negative prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as ProM, over the 27 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and ProM was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Celonis Process Intelligence Platform21 of 271Not among the top eight

SAP Signavio Process Intelligence14 of 270Not among the top eight

UiPath Process Mining14 of 270Not among the top eight

Apromore13 of 277Not among the top eight

PM4Py13 of 270Not among the top eight

IBM Process Mining10 of 270Not among the top eight

Fluxicon Disco8 of 271Not among the top eight

Microsoft Power Automate7 of 270Not among the top eight

Microsoft Power Automate Process Mining5 of 272Not among the top eight

Disco4 of 271Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named ProM. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 25 of the 27 answers that named ProM and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

processmind.com13

g2.com12

us.fitgap.com12

bardeen.ai11

kyp.ai10

skan.ai10

guideflow.com9

learn.g2.com9

processminingpro.com8

historytools.org7

No domain is on file for ProM, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

bardeen.ai/best/process-mining-tools10

guideflow.com/blog/process-mining-tools9

learn.g2.com/best-process-mining-software9

us.fitgap.com/search/process-mining-tools/small-business8

historytools.org/ai/process-mining-software-comparison7

noxus.ai/roundups/best-process-mining-tools7

process.st/process-mining7

processmind.com/resources/blog/the-best-process-mining-tools-of-20267

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where ProM stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 90,500 a month (“prom”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 92,715 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 14 of 61 in process mining

Segment leader

19%

Apromore

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 27 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

Names read as ProM

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as ProM; a claim can dispute any of them.

ProM (Process Mining Framework) 3

Follow ProM

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when ProM's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as ProM, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for ProM by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where ProM is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name ProM, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.