21
Nitin Kumar Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne [email protected] u.au Minor thesis for semester 2, 2009, under the supervision of Dr. Sebastian Sardina, RMIT university Implementation and analysis of simulation based techniques for behavior composition

Nitin Kumar Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne [email protected]

  • Upload
    galen

  • View
    56

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Implementation and analysis of simulation based techniques for behavior composition. Nitin Kumar Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne [email protected]. Minor thesis for semester 2, 2009, under the supervision of Dr. Sebastian Sardina , RMIT university. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Nitin Kumar YadavRMIT University, Melbourne

[email protected]

Minor thesis for semester 2, 2009, under the supervision of Dr. Sebastian Sardina, RMIT university

Implementation and analysis of simulation based techniques for behavior composition

Page 2: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Implementation and analysis of simulation based techniques for behavior composition

Behavior CompositionSimulationTechniquesImplementation Analysis

Contents

Page 3: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Behavior Composition

3

What is a behavior ?

• Behavior – Logic of a machine– Web service– Stand alone component

• Abstracted as finite transition systems• Available behaviors can be non-deterministic

B1 B2

Page 4: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Behavior Composition

4

Combining available behaviors to realize a target behavior

Available behaviors

Target behavior(virtual)

T1

Can we realize T1 by composing B1 and B2 ?

B1 B2

Page 5: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Behavior Composition

5

Combined finite transition system of available behaviors

‘composed’ transition system of available behaviors

B1

B2

Asynchronous product of B1 and B2

Page 6: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Behavior Composition

6

Combined finite transition system of available behaviors

B1

B2

Asynchronous product of B1 and B2

‘composed’ transition system of available behaviors

Page 7: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Behavior Composition

7

Combined finite transition system of available behaviors

B1

B2

Asynchronous product of B1 and B2

Can this behave like the target system ?

Page 8: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Simulation

8

• A transition system T1 simulates another transition system T2 iff T1 can ‘mimic’ all the states of T2

• A state in the available system mimics another state in the target system if:– It can do all the actions that the target state can do– The successor state in the available system as a result of

such an action simulates the resulting state in the target system

• Simulation is a relation of states of the composed system and the states of the target behavior which can be ‘mimicked’.

Page 9: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Simulation

9

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T2>}…

Simulation Relation

simulation relationis a solution to the behavior

Composition problem !

How to calculate it ?

Page 10: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Techniques

10

Two approaches for behavior composition

• Regression based approach [Sardina,Patrizi & De Giacomo, KR 2008]

• Progression based approach [Stroeder & Pagnucco, 2009, IJCAI 2009]

Proceedings of Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), pages 640-650, Sydney, Australia, September 2008. AAAI Press.

Accepted for the IJCAI 2009

Page 11: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Techniques

11

Regression based approach [Sardina, Patrizi, De Giacomo]

• Assume each state in the available system simulates each state in the target system

• Iteratively remove non-conformant links which don’t’ follow the simulation definition i.e., – Can not perform the actions which can be requested

in the matching target state– The successor state of the action does not follow the

above rule

• Stop when no more links can be removed

Page 12: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Regression based approach

12

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S1,S1>, <T2>}{<S1,S1>, <T3>}{<S2,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T2>}{<S2,S1>, <T3>}{<S2,S2>, <T1>}{<S2,S2>, <T2>}{<S2,S2>, <T3>}{<S1,S2>, <T1>}{<S1,S2>, <T2>}{<S1,S2>, <T3>}

Assume each state from availablebehaviors simulates each stateIn the target system

Page 13: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Regression based approach

13

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S1,S1>, <T2>}{<S1,S1>, <T3>}{<S2,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T2>}{<S2,S1>, <T3>}{<S2,S2>, <T1>}{<S2,S2>, <T2>}{<S2,S2>, <T3>}{<S1,S2>, <T1>}{<S1,S2>, <T2>}{<S1,S2>, <T3>}

Each Cycle : step 1 – remove the States which can not perform the Actions of the linked target state

Page 14: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Regression based approach

14

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S1,S1>, <T2>}{<S2,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T2>}{<S2,S2>, <T1>}{<S2,S2>, <T2>}{<S2,S2>, <T3>}{<S1,S2>, <T1>}{<S1,S2>, <T3>}

Each Cycle : step 2 – remove the States whose successor states are not in the simulation relation

X

Continue till no more links can beremoved

Page 15: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Techniques

15

Progression based approach [Stroder & Pagnucco]

• Start from the initial state• Iteratively add conformant links between the

states of the composed system and the target system

• Stop when no more links can be added

Page 16: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Progression based approach

16

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S2>, <T1>}{<S1,S2>, <T1>}

Start from states those ‘canMimic the initial state

Page 17: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Progression based approach

17

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S2>, <T1>}{<S1,S2>, <T1>}

{<S2,S1>, <T2>}{<S2,S2>, <T2>}

Iteratively add links

Page 18: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

t

Progression based approach

18

Example

Available behaviors

Target System

{<S1,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S1>, <T1>}{<S2,S2>, <T1>}{<S1,S2>, <T1>}

{<S2,S1>, <T2>}{<S2,S2>, <T2>}

{<S2,S2>, <T3>}

Iteratively add links

X

Page 19: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Implementation

19

Implementation of both the techniques on a common platform

• Implement both approaches on a common platform – Java

• Prototype implementation available.

1. TLV implementation for deterministic available behaviors is available, but not for non-deterministic behaviors. Symfony is another system, but Lacks some of the components.

Page 20: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Analysis

20

Comparing the speed of the techniques

• Measure the speed of both the algorithms for the problems

• Design benchmark problems– Hand crafted• Problems for which a known solution exists• Problems for which a solution does not exist

– Randomly generated problems– Variation in size and number of available behaviors

• If time left in minor thesis– Study algorithm’s behavior with respect to• Varying degrees of non determinism in available behaviors

Page 21: Nitin Kumar  Yadav RMIT University, Melbourne nitin.yadav@student.rmit.au

Questions ?

Comparing the speed of the techniques