1 / 101

Service-Oriented Integration of Component and Organizational MultiAgent Models

Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour Ecole doctorale des sciences exactes et de leurs applications ED 211 Spécialité : Informatique. Laboratoire d'Informatique de l'Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour. Service-Oriented Integration of Component and Organizational MultiAgent Models.

topaz
Download Presentation

Service-Oriented Integration of Component and Organizational MultiAgent Models

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour Ecole doctorale des sciences exactes et de leurs applications ED 211 Spécialité : Informatique Laboratoire d'Informatique de l'Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour Service-Oriented Integration of Component and OrganizationalMultiAgent Models sous la direction de Philippe Aniorté Co-encadrée par Eric Cariou et Eric Gouardères par Nour Alhouda Aboud

  2. Outline • Context and motivation • Component based approaches (interests and shortages) • MultiAgent Systems (interests and shortages) • Service Oriented Architecture • Objective • Contribution • Conclusion & future work

  3. Outline • Context and motivation • Contribution • Starting point: Framework and Case study • The general Service model • The general Component model • The general Agent model • Component Agent Service Oriented Model • Mappings and variants • Conclusion & future work

  4. Context and motivation [Sommerville, 2004]

  5. Context and motivation • These approaches are not sufficient independently [Braubachet al., 2011] [Marino et al.,2009] [Zhang et al., 2008] [Grondinet al.,2006] [Papazoglouet al.,2004] [Krutischet al.,2003] [Preistet al.,2001] [Sommerville, 2004]

  6. Context and motivation • Limitations: New approach ? • Merges their interests in a single entity • Keep the originality of each approach independently of the others • Reach interoperable agents and components via service in one application specification • Use new gained characteristics when needed • An approach is more preponderant than the other • An approach views the component and agent ones in equity

  7. Context and motivation • Component based approaches • What is a component? • Reusable entity with well specified access points (ports) to expose or use services (interfaces) • Primitive simplest type of component • Composite hierarchical composition of sub components Provided interface Required interface Components are reusable pieces of software ATM Ticket TicketIssure Card BankAccount FrontEnd Money Code

  8. Context and motivation • Component based approaches • Which approach can overcome this problem? Problem: Interoperability and low level interactions EJB Fractal CCM Wright UML2.0 Rapide EDOC Reusability composition

  9. Context and motivation • MultiAgent System (MAS) • What is an agent? • Autonomous rational entity (goal directed behaviour) • Social ability to cooperate, coordinate, and negotiate with each other. • What is an OMAS? • Sets of agents that interact with each other in a common environment forming organizations which makeup systems of collaborative services interaction Sensors Sensors percepts Environment Effectors Agent Agent actions

  10. Context and motivation • MultiAgent System (MAS) • How to integrate agents and components? Problem: Lack of reusability and composition GORMAS AGR FAML OMNI MOISE Passi GAIA High levels of interaction Autonomy & goal directed behaviour

  11. Context and motivation • Service • Logical representation of a repeatable business activity that has a specified outcome • Services for the integration of component and agent approaches • Interoperabilitybetween service providers and consumer • Abstraction a service providers or consumer can be implemented by an agent or component • Relationships with components and agents • Service & component : reusability purposes • Service & agent : flexibility and dynamicity purposes ATM Get Money requires provides service Client Service provider Service consumer

  12. Global characteristics Service Abstraction Interoperability Composition Reusability Behavioral & Goal driven High-level interactions Agent Component

  13. Objective • How? • 1- High level of connectivity (interoperability) depending on the concept of serviceandhigh level interactions • 2- A frameworkthatdefines all relation kinds between the three domains What? Integration of component and agent approaches • Why? • To benefitfrom the strength points of one approach in overcoming the weakness points of the other in using the jointly in distributed systems development ??? !!!

  14. Objective • Framework: overview Service Model Abstract models Component Model Agent Model CASOM Model Concrete models … … … AC Fractal EJB AGR OMNI Componentification Agentification Projection / Abstraction • Componentification : the added value of the component approach to existing agents Agentification : the added value of the agent approach to existing components • CASOM: Component Agent Service Oriented Model • Integration of component and agent

  15. Outline • Context and motivation • Contribution • Starting point: Case study and Framework • The general Service model • The general Component model • The general Agent model • Component Agent Service Oriented Model • Mappings and variants • Conclusion & future work

  16. Case study • Holiday reservation system Travel agency Hotel Y Hotel X 1 Hotel X 2 A1 Hotels X Agent Group of Agents Hotel X 3 Client Airline Company 1 A2 Airline Company 2 Query Component Negotiate

  17. Contribution • Framework: models Service Model Abstract models Component Model Agent Model CASOM Model Concrete models … … … AC Fractal EJB AGR OMNI Componentification Agentification Projection / Abstraction

  18. Methodology • First step: Models study • Study representative models in each domain (30 models) • Focus on the concepts of service and interaction • Result: existing models do not respond to our needs • Service models: participants • Component models: low-level interactions • Agent models: implicit service • Second step: Models definitions • Define general models where the concepts of service and interaction are central and explicit • Unify some concepts name between the three models • Use UML class diagrams + OCL to define the general models

  19. Service

  20. Our General Service Model

  21. Our General Service Model

  22. Our General Service Model

  23. Our General Service Model

  24. Our General Service Model

  25. Our General Service Model

  26. Our General Service Model

  27. Our General Service Model

  28. Our General Service Model

  29. Component

  30. Our General Component Model

  31. Our General Component Model

  32. Our General Component Model

  33. Our General Component Model

  34. Our General Component Model

  35. Our General Component Model

  36. Our General Component Model

  37. Our General Component Model

  38. Our General Component Model

  39. Our General Component Model

  40. Our General Component Model

  41. Agent

  42. Our General Agent Model

  43. Our General Agent Model

  44. Our General Agent Model

  45. Our General Agent Model

  46. Our General Agent Model

  47. Our General Agent Model

  48. Our General Agent Model

  49. Our General Agent Model

  50. Our General Agent Model

More Related