Situated process engineering for integrating processes from methodologies to infrastructures

Situated Process Engineering for Integrating Processesfrom Methodologies to Infrastructures

Ambra Molesini Elena Nardini Enrico Denti Andrea Omicini

Alma Mater Studiorum – Universita di Bologna{ambra.molesini,elena.nardini,enrico.denti,andrea.omicini}@unibo.it

24th ACM Symposium on Applied ComputingSpecial Track on AOSE Methodologies and Systems

Waikiki Beach, Honolulu, HI, USA9 March 2009

Molesini/Nardini/Denti/Omicini (UniBo) SODA+TuCSoN SAC 2009 1 / 30

1 Foreword

2 BackgroundSODATuCSoN

3 Integration

4 Conclusions & Future Work

5 Bibliography


Scenario

The creation of a single universally-applicable development process isa recognised chimera

→ Software designers tend to define their own problem-specific process bymeans of the Method engineering technique

→ New process can be created starting from existing process parts(method fragments)

A unified meta-model and a specific AO Method Engineeringtechnique are needed, allowing existing methodologies/ processes tobe represented and integrated in a uniform way

The Software Process Engineering Metamodel (SPEM) 2.0[Object Management Group, 2008] and the Agent-OrientedSituational Method Engineering [Cossentino et al., 2008] seem to bethe natural candidates


Objectives

→ Understanding the semantics of the infrastructures’ processes

→ Exploring SPEM 2.0 applicability to the AOSE methodologies andinfrastructures

→ Exploring the applicability of Agent-Oriented Situational MethodEngineering for composing methodologies and infrastructures

→ A simple case studyI methodology: SODAI infrastructure: TuCSoN


AOSE Methodologies & MAS Infrastructures: The Gap

AOSE methodologies: top-down evolution

Most AOSE methodologies have mostly followed a top-downevolution path, where abstractions and metaphors (models andstructures) from human organisations have been used to analyse,model and design software systemsThis is the case of methodologies like Gaia, Tropos, PASSI and SODA

MAS infrastructure: bottom-up evolution

Many MAS infrastructures have mostly followed a bottom-upevolution path, evolving out of necessity from existing programminglanguages and development environments, “stretching” the agentparadigm on top of more traditional paradigms and technologiesDespite JADE, TuCSoN, TOTA, among the many others, introducespecific agent-oriented abstractions, yet, the imprint of theobject-oriented paradigm is still visible—for instance, in agents takingthe form of Java threads


AOSE Methodologies & MAS Infrastructures: The Gap

AOSE methodologies: top-down evolution

Most AOSE methodologies have mostly followed a top-downevolution path, where abstractions and metaphors (models andstructures) from human organisations have been used to analyse,model and design software systemsThis is the case of methodologies like Gaia, Tropos, PASSI and SODA

MAS infrastructure: bottom-up evolution

Many MAS infrastructures have mostly followed a bottom-upevolution path, evolving out of necessity from existing programminglanguages and development environments, “stretching” the agentparadigm on top of more traditional paradigms and technologiesDespite JADE, TuCSoN, TOTA, among the many others, introducespecific agent-oriented abstractions, yet, the imprint of theobject-oriented paradigm is still visible—for instance, in agents takingthe form of Java threads


Previous Work

[Cabri et al., 2008] and [Molesini et al., 2008] explore a mappingbetween methodologies’ meta-models and infrastructures’meta-models

Such investigations have paved the way towards a more precisemapping between the concepts supported by methodologies andinfrastructures leading to the definition of infrastructures’meta-models

However, this is still not enough for a software development processaimed at covering all the stages of the software lifecycle

In fact, this approach provides only guidelines on abstractions’mapping. . .

. . . but says nothing about the process resulting from such anintegration and how to use it


Infrastructure Process

The presence of a specific infrastructure clearly affects the engineeringprocess [Molesini et al., 2009]

→ There would be no need to design a function if it is already provided bythe services/functionalities of the selected infrastructure

The methodologies processes could be influenced by the adoption ofan infrastructure instead of another

Infrastructures represent a key piece of the software developmentprocess

→ Infrastructures do have a process behind themI it is usually ‘silent’ and unspecified

→ To define a complete software development process, we believe thatsuch an infrastructure process needs to come ‘out of the water’, so asto be first explicitly detailed, and then clearly integrated with themethodologies’ process


Key Idea

We mean to re-useI Agent-Oriented Situational Method Engineering (AO-SME) technique

[Cossentino et al., 2008, Cossentino et al., 2007]I Software Process Engineering Meta-model (SPEM)

[Object Management Group, 2008]

For integrating methodologies and infrastructures

→ We consider methodology and infrastructure as two fragments to beintegrated in order to obtain a new software process

→ We use the integration between SODA and TuCSoN as a case study


Outline

1 Foreword


3 Integration


5 Bibliography


SODA: Societies in Open and Distributed Agent spaces

SODA . . .

. . . is an agent-oriented methodology for theanalysis and design of agent-based systems. . . focuses on inter-agent issues, like theengineering of societies and environment forMAS. . . adopts agents and artifacts – after theA&A meta-model – as the main buildingblocks for MAS development. . . introduces a simple layering principle inorder to cope with the complexity of systemdescription. . . adopts a tabular representation


The SODA meta-modelSODA 2008/09/04

Actor Requirement

*1

Relation LegacySystem ExternalEnvironment

* 1

Task

1..*

1

Dependency

**

participates

**

participates

* *

participates

Function

* *participates

Topology

*

*

participates

*

*

participates

1..*

1

1..*

1

0..*

1

0..*

1

0..*

1

Role

Action

1..*

1

performs

Interaction

Resource

Operation

1..*

1provides

1..*

1

1

1..*

1..*

1

1

1..*

Space *

*

participates

1..*

1..*

participates*

1

0..*

connection

1..*

1

1..*

1

Workspace

1..*

1..*

Agent

1

1..*

Artifact

1..*

1

perceives 1..*

1

is allocated

Composition

Society Aggregate

Individual Artifact

Social Artifact

Environmental Artifact

1..*

1

participates

Rule

0..*

1..*

constrains

connection

** participates* *

participates

1..* 1..*constrains

1..*1..*

constrains

1..*

1..*constrains

1

1..*

1

1..*

1

1..*

Uses1..*1..* 1..*1..*

Manifests1..*

1..*1..*

1..*

Speaks to 1..* 1..*

participates

1..*

1..*

Links to

1..*

1..*

Autonomous Behaviour

exhibits

exhibits

Functional Behaviour

exhibits

exhibits

1..*

1..*

participates

Requirements Analysis

Analysis

Architectural Design

Detailed Design


The SODA Process

Requirements Analysis

Analysis

Layering

Architectural Design

Layering

Detailed Design

Is the problem well specified?

no

Is the system well specified?

yes

yes no

Are there problems in the system?

yes

no


Layering in SODA as a Capability Pattern

In-zoom Out-zoom

Projection

Select Layer

increases detail increases abstraction

new layer?

no

yes


Detailed Design Process

Carving

Mapping

Agent design Environment design Workspace design

Interactions design

noyes

is the system well specified?


Outline

1 Foreword


3 Integration


5 Bibliography


TuCSoN: Tuple Centres Spread over the Network

TuCSoN . . .

. . . is a MAS infrastructure for thecommunication and coordination ofagent-based systems. . . adopts ReSpecT as a language forexpressing the behaviour specification oftuple centre. . . introduces Agent Coordination Contextas the conceptual boundary between anagent and its organisational environment


The TuCSoN meta-modelTuCSoN

TopologyNetworkNode

Reaction

Tuple Centrenn

runs

Event

Tuple0..n0..n

stored

ACC

accesses

OrganisationRole** **

Reaction Spec

nn

t riggers execution of

Agentread/write

uses

negotiation/join

plays

programs

Events can be both internally generated and perceived from the tuple centre.


TuCSoN Process

Organisation Definition

Organisation Implementation Organisation Test

Yes

New Interation ?

No


Organisation Definition Process

Agent Behaviour Definition

Organisation Test Definition

Society Class Definition

Society Instance Definition

TC Behaviour DefinitionTopology Definition

New Iteration ? Yes

No


Agent-Oriented Situational Method Engineering

Our approach is based on the composition process approach byCossentino et al. [Cossentino et al., 2008]

I process analysis → kind of process & a set of MAS Meta-modelelements (MMMEs)

I process design → method fragments selection and assemblyI process deployment → process istantiation


Analysis Outcome

Since both SODA process and TuCSoN process are iterative andincremental

→ SODA+TuCSoN will be iterative and incremental

MMMEs mapping

!"#$%&"'"()*

+),)"'"()

!"#$%

&'()

*+,-.)/0/

1/)/

2-,3/405

6')0/)4),0-074/5,54-,48)+(074+/08+00)944,)((+4:+80-;+4<),=5,54:5-4>-?:()?),0+0)>4+008+<)8/54@)-4:8505;5((-94?+4,)(4,5/0854?)0+A?5@)((54+BB-+?54:8).)8-054>;+(;+8)>4/'((+4@-/0-,C-5,)4@)-40-:-4@-4-,0)8+C-5,)4;D)4:5//5,54+<<),-8)44

E'F"5G

":)+3/405

"5;-)0H%==8)=+0) I583/:+;)%=),0

J,@-<-@'+(%80-.+;0

K,<-85,L%80-.+;0

"5;-+(%80-.+;0

M

&5()

%;0-5,

#:)8+0-5,

F558@-,+0-5,N8-?-0-<)/

E':()4F),08)

%FFE':()4F),08)#:)8+0-5,

K<),0

O)D+<-5'84":);

&)+;0-5,

N5(-;H

&5() G5@) %=),0 #8=+,-/+0-5,

2-,3)@E':()F),08)


Key Questions

The integration between a methodology process and an infrastructureprocess raises a new peculiar problem

I the impact of the infrastructure process onto the software engineeringprocess

So, a process designer should be prepared to answer several keyquestions before facing the process integration

I Where does the infrastructure process intervene?I Does the integration change the methodology or infrastructure – and if

so, how – and the format of their Workproducts?I . . .


The SODA+TuCSoN Integrated Process

The TuCSoN process can be naturally located at the end of theSODA process

I SODA is neutral with respect to the implementation technologiesI The MMMEs involved in the assembly are just either SODA

abstractions that belong to the Design phase, or TuCSoN abstractionsbelonging to the Organisation Definition phase

I Since neither SODA nor TuCSoN make any assumption on the natureof agents, TuCSoN does not influence the SODA process in its earlystages, nor does SODA influence the TuCSoN process’ late stages

SODA does not change its nature in the integrationI SODA Workproducts could change


The SODA+TuCSoN Integrated Process

TuCSoN

SODA


Organisation Design Process

Carving

Mapping

Agent design Environment design Workspace design

Interactions design

Society Class Definition

Society Instance Definition

Topology DefinitionAgent Behaviour Definition

TC Behaviour Definition

Organisation Test Definitionno

Is the system well designed?

yes


Organisation Design Process


Conclusions

Since this research is still in its early stage, we are well aware that ourcurrent approach opens many questions, which are only partiallyaddressed

I the role and the impact of the MAS infrastructures in the softwareengineering process

I the meaning of a process of an infrastructure

Future workI a generalisation of our study about of the methodologies and

infrastructure integrationI the improvement of the description of the TuCSoN processI a better understanding of the adequacy of the SME technique and of

the prioritisation algorithm to evaluate whether they could cover “asthey are” also the integration among methodologies and infrastructuresfragments that present the new issues highlighted or they need someextension

I we also plan to make the same experiments with other methodologiesand infrastructures


Bibliography I

Cabri, G., Leonardi, L., and Puviani, M. (2008).Methodologies and infrastructures for agent society simulation:Mapping passi and RoleX.In Trappl, R., editor, Cybernetics and Systems 2008, Vienna, Austria.Vienna: Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies.Proceedings of the 19th European Meeting on Cybernetics andSystems Research, Vienna, Austria, 2007.

Cossentino, M., Gaglio, S., Garro, A., and Seidita, V. (2007).Method fragments for agent design methodologies: fromstandardisation to research.International Journal of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering(IJAOSE), 1(1):91–121.


Bibliography II

Cossentino, M., Gaglio, S., Gaud, N., Hilaire, V., Koukam, A., andSeidita, V. (2008).A MAS metamodel-driven approach to process composition.In Luck, M. and Gomez-Sanz, J., editors, 9th International Workshopon Agent Oriented Software Engineering (AOSE’08), AAMAS 2008,Estoril, Portugal.

Molesini, A., Denti, E., and Omicini, A. (2008).From AO methodologies to MAS infrastructures: The SODA casestudy.In Artikis, A., O’Hare, G., Stathis, K., and Vouros, G., editors,Engineering Societies in the Agents World VIII, volume 4995 of LNAI,pages 300–317. Springer.8th International Workshop (ESAW’07), 22–24 October 2007, Athens,Greece.


Bibliography III

Molesini, A., Nardini, E., Denti, E., and Omicini, A. (2009).Situated process engineering for integrating processes frommethodologies to infrastructures.In Shin, S. Y., Ossowski, S., Menezes, R., and Viroli, M., editors, 24thAnnual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2009),Honolulu, Hawai’i, USA. ACM.

Object Management Group (2008).Software & Systems Process Engineering Meta-Model Specification2.0.http://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/2.0/PDF.


Situated Process Engineering for Integrating Processesfrom Methodologies to Infrastructures

Ambra Molesini Elena Nardini Enrico Denti Andrea Omicini

Alma Mater Studiorum – Universita di Bologna{ambra.molesini,elena.nardini,enrico.denti,andrea.omicini}@unibo.it

24th ACM Symposium on Applied ComputingSpecial Track on AOSE Methodologies and Systems

Waikiki Beach, Honolulu, HI, USA9 March 2009


Documents

Situated process engineering for integrating processes from methodologies to infrastructures