Agent Coordination via Scripting Languages

Schneider, Jean-Guy; Lumpe, Markus; Nierstrasz, Oscar

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-04401-8_6

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This parallel composition roughly arises by augmenting probabilistic au-tomata [39] with feature interfaces. Note that our approach separates between computation and coordination [20,34,38], which allows for specifying features in the context of various different dynamic SPLs. Feature-oriented extensions of programming languages and specialized composition operators such as superimposition are an orthogonal approach [1][2][3]29].…”

Section: Verification Of Splsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probabilistic model checking for energy analysis in software product lines

Dubslaff

Klüppelholz

Baier

2014

Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Modularity - MODULARITY '14

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a software product line (SPL), a collection of software products is defined by their commonalities in terms of features rather than explicitly specifying all products one-by-one. Several verification techniques were adapted to establish temporal properties of SPLs. Symbolic and family-based model checking have been proven to be successful for tackling the combinatorial blow-up arising when reasoning about several feature combinations. However, most formal verification approaches for SPLs presented in the literature focus on the static SPLs, where the features of a product are fixed and cannot be changed during runtime. This is in contrast to dynamic SPLs, allowing to adapt feature combinations of a product dynamically after deployment.The main contribution of the paper is a compositional modeling framework for dynamic SPLs, which supports probabilistic and nondeterministic choices and allows for quantitative analysis. We specify the feature changes during runtime within an automatabased coordination component, enabling to reason over strategies how to trigger dynamic feature changes for optimizing various quantitative objectives, e.g., energy or monetary costs and reliability. For our framework there is a natural and conceptually simple translation into the input language of the prominent probabilistic model checker PRISM. This facilitates the application of PRISM's powerful symbolic engine to the operational behavior of dynamic SPLs and their family-based analysis against various quantitative queries. We demonstrate feasibility of our approach by a case study issuing an energy-aware bonding network device.

show abstract

Section: Verification Of Splsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probabilistic model checking for energy analysis in software product lines

Dubslaff

Klüppelholz

Baier

2014

Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Modularity - MODULARITY '14

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, WSDL is also used to describe the external interface to the workflow. This allows BPEL4WS to be compositionally complete, which means that the composition of Web services are exposed as a single Web service eligible to participate in other compositions [30].…”

Section: Bpel4wsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These changes are a logical consequence of the seminal work in coordination technology done by Gelertner. As a result of Gelertner's work, the old computer science adage Applications = Algorithms + Data is being replaced by Applications = Computation + Coordination [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Adaptive Workflow Enactment Using Multiagent Systems

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Advances in Information Technology have created opportunities for business enterprises to redesign their information and process management systems. The redesigned systems will likely employ some form of workflow management system. Workflow management systems exactly enact business processes described in a process description language. Unfortunately, such strict adherence to the prescribed workflow makes it impossible for the system to adapt to unforeseen circumstances. We firmly believe that the historic trajectory of software development paradigms and IT advancements will establish multiagent systems as the workflow enactment mechanism of the future. In this paper we provide a critical survey of workflow, workflow description languages, web services and agent technologies. We propose that workflow description languages and their associated design tools can be used to specify a multiagent system. Specifically, we advance the idea that the Business Process Execution Language for Web Services (BPEL4WS) can be used as a specification language for expressing the initial social order of the multiagent system, which can then intelligently adapt to changing environmental conditions.

show abstract

“…Scripts, specialized workflow description languages, and formal methods can be used for process description [13], [14]. Several workflow description languages exist.…”

Section: Process Coordination and Workflow Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%