Advertisement

Modeling Dynamic Engineering Design Processes in PSI

  • Vadim Ermolayev
  • Eyck Jentzsch
  • Oleg Karsayev
  • Natalya Keberle
  • Wolf-Ekkehard Matzke
  • Vladimir Samoylov
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3770)

Abstract

One way to make engineering design effective and efficient is to make its processes flexible – i.e. self-adjusting, self-configuring, and self-optimizing at run time. This paper presents the descriptive part of the Dynamic Engineering Design Process (DEDP) modeling framework developed in the PSI project. The project aims to build a software tool to assist managers to analyze and enhance the productivity of the DEDPs through process simulations. The framework incorporates the models of teams and actors, tasks and activities as well as design artifacts as the major interrelated parts. DEDPs are modeled as weakly defined flows of tasks and atomic activities which may only “become apparent” at run time because of several presented dynamic factors. The processes are self-formed through the mechanisms of collaboration in the dynamic team of actors. These mechanisms are based on several types of contracting negotiations. DEDP productivity is assessed by the Units of Welfare collected by the multi-agent system which models the design team. The models of the framework are formalized in the family of DEDP ontologies.

Keywords

Multiagent System Design Team Material Input Atomic Activity Eventual Input 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Neal, D., Smith, H., Butler, D.: The evolution of business processes from description to data to smart executable code – is this the future of systems integration and collaborative commerce? Research Services Journal, 39–49 (March 2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gorodetsky, V., et al.: Agent-Based Framework for Simulation and Support of Dynamic Engineering Design Processes in PSI. In: Pěchouček, M., Petta, P., Varga, L.Z. (eds.) CEEMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3690, pp. 511–520. Springer, Heidelberg (2005), draft, http://eva.zsu.zp.ua/eva_personal/PS/PSI-CEEMAS.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ermolayev, V., et al.: Towards a framework for agent-enabled semantic web service composition. Int. J. of Web Services Research 1(3), 63–87 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ermolayev, V., et al.: Agent-Based Dynamic Engineering Design Process Modeling Framework. Technical Report. Cadence Design Systems, GmbH, 29 p. (2004), http://eva.zsu.zp.ua/eva_personal/PS/PSI-DEDP-MF-v10-Feb-2004.pdf
  5. 5.
    Ermolayev, V., Keberle, N., Tolok, V.: OIL Ontologies for Collaborative Task Performance in Coalitions of Self-Interested Actors. In: Arisawa, H., Kambayashi, Y., Kumar, V., Mayr, H.C., Hunt, I. (eds.) ER Workshops 2001. LNCS, vol. 2465, pp. 390–402. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Uschold, M., Jasper, R.: A Framework for Understanding and Classifying Ontology Applications. In: 12-th Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management (KAW 1999), Banff, Alberta, CA, October 16-21 (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gorodetsky, V., et al.: Multi Agent System Development Kit: MAS software tool implementing GAIA Methodology. In: Shi, Z., He, Q. (eds.) Int. Conf. on Intelligent Information Processing (IIP 2004), Beijing, pp. 69–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cutkosky, M.R., et al.: PACT: An Experiment in Integrating Concurrent Engineering Systems. IEEE Computer 26(1), 28–38 (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Darr, T.P., Birmingham, W.P.: An Attribute-Space Representation and Algorithm for Concurrent Engineering. CSE-TR-221-94, University of Michigan, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2122 (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Balasubramanian, S., Norrie, D.H.: A multi-agent intelligent design system integrating manufacturing and shop-floor control. In: Proc. First Int. Conf. on Multi-Agent Syst., San Francisco, pp. 3–9 (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parunak, H.V.D., et al.: The RAPPID Project: Symbiosis between Industrial Requirements and MAS Research. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2, 111–140 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Danesh, M.R., Jin, Y.: An Agent-Based Decision Network for Concurrent Engineering Design. CERA 9(1), 37–47 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fox, M.C., Gruninger, M.: Enterprise Modelling. AI Magazine 19(3), 109–121 (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Uschold M., et al.: The Enterprise Ontology. Knowledge Engineering Review 13(1) (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boella, G., van der Torre, L.: An Agent Oriented Ontology of Social Reality. In: Varzi, A., Vieu, L. (eds.) Proc. 3-d Int. Conf. on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS 2004), Turin, November 3-6, pp. 199–209 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Buhler, P., Vidal, J.M.: Enacting BPEL4WS specified workflows with multiagent systems. In: Proc. of the Workshop on Web Services and Agent-Based Engineering (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fensel, D., Bussler, C.: The Web Service Modeling Framework WSMF. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 1(2), 113–137 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nagendra Prasad, M.V., Lesser, V.R.: Learning situation-specific coordination in cooperative multi-agent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2(2), 173–207 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blythe, J.: Decision-Theoretic Planning. AI Magazine 20(2) (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Erol, K., Hendler, J., Nau, D.S.: Semantics for Hierarchical Task-Network Planning. Technical report CS-TR-3239, University of Maryland at College Park (1994)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rajpathak, D., Motta, E.: An Ontological Formalization of the Planning Task. In: Varzi, A., Vieu, L. (eds.) Proc. 3-d Int. Conf. on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS 2004), Turin, November 3-6 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Capera, D., Picard, G., Gleizes, M.-P.: Applying ADELFE Methodology to a Mechanism Design Problem. In: Proc. 3-d Int. Joint Conf. AAMAS 2004, pp. 1508–1509 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vadim Ermolayev
    • 3
  • Eyck Jentzsch
    • 1
  • Oleg Karsayev
    • 2
  • Natalya Keberle
    • 3
  • Wolf-Ekkehard Matzke
    • 1
  • Vladimir Samoylov
    • 2
  1. 1.Cadence Design Systems, GmbHFeldkirchenGermany
  2. 2.SPII RASSaint PetersburgRussia
  3. 3.Zaporozhye National Univ.ZaporozhyeUkraine

Personalised recommendations