Dynamically changing behavior: An agent-oriented view to modeling intelligent information systems

  • Can Türker
  • Stefan Conrad
  • Gunter Saake
Communications Session 7A Intelligent Information Systems
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1079)


Although object specification technology is successfully used for modeling information systems, it is not able to get a grasp of dynamically changing behavior. Due to the fact that objects in information systems can have a very long life-span, it often happens that during the life of an object external requirements are changing (e.g. changes of laws or banking rules). Such changes often require the object to adopt another behavior. The main problem for current object specification approaches is that, in general, not all possible changes can be taken into account in advance at specification time. Therefore, a flexible extension is needed to capture this situation. The approach we present and discuss in this paper is an important step towards a specification framework based on the concept of agent by introducing a certain form of knowledge as part of the internal state.


Specification Framework Traditional Object Flexible Extension Modeling Information System Modern Information System 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Bro92]
    M. L. Brodie. The Promise of Distributed Computing and the Challenges of Legacy Systems. In Advanced Database Systems: Proc. 10th British National Conf. on Databases, pp. 1–28. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. [Buc90]
    A. P. Buchmann. Modeling Heterogeneous Systems as an Active Object Space. In Proc. 4th Int. Workshop on Persistent Object Systems, pp. 279–290. Morgan Kaufmann, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [CS95]
    S. Conrad and G. Saake. Evolving Temporal Behaviour in Information Systems. In HOA'95 — Higher-Order Algebra, Logic, and Term Rewriting (2nd Int. Workshop), pp. PP7:1–16. Participant's Proceedings, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. [FM91]
    J. Fiadeiro and T. Maibaum. Towards Object Calculi. In G. Saake and A. Sernadas, eds., Information Systems — Correctness and Reusability, pp. 129–178. TU Braunschweig, Informatik Bericht 91-03, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. [GK94]
    M. R. Genesereth and S. P. Ketchpel. Software Agents. Communications of the ACM, 37(7):48–53, July 1994.Google Scholar
  6. [HPS93]
    M. Huhns, M. P. Papazoglou, and G. Schlageter, eds., Proc. Int. Conf. Intelligent and Cooperating Information Systems. IEEE Computer Society, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. [HSJ+94]
    T. Hartmann, G. Saake, R. Jungclaus, P. Hartel, and J. Kusch. Revised Version of the Modelling Language Troll (Version 2.0). Informatik-Bericht 94-03, Technische Universität Braunschweig, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. [JSHS96]
    R. Jungclaus, G. Saake, T. Hartmann, and C. Sernadas. Troll — A Language for Object-Oriented Specification of Information Systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 1996. To appear.Google Scholar
  9. [Mey92]
    J.-J. Ch. Meyer. Modal Logics for Knowledge Representation. In R. P. van de Riet and R. A. Meersman, editors, Linguistic Instruments in Knowledge Engineering, pp. 251–275. North-Holland, 1992.Google Scholar
  10. [Rya93]
    M. Ryan. Defaults in Specifications. In Proc. Int. Symposium on Requirements Engineering, pp. 142–149. IEEE Computer Society, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [SCT95]
    G. Saake, S. Conrad, and C. Türker. From Object Specification towards Agent Design. In OOER'95 — Proc. 14th Int. Conf. on Object-Oriented and Entity-Relationship Modeling, pp. 329–340. Springer, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. [Sho93]
    Y. Shoham. Agent-Oriented Programming. Artificial Intelligence, 60(1):51–92, March 1993.Google Scholar
  13. [SJH93]
    G. Saake, R. Jungclaus, and T. Hartmann. Application Modelling in Heterogeneous Environments Using an Object Specification Language. Int. Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, 2(4):425–449, 1993.Google Scholar
  14. [SSE87]
    A. Sernadas, C. Sernadas, and H.-D. Ehrich. Object-Oriented Specification of Databases: An Algebraic Approach. In Proc. 13th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 107–116. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1987.Google Scholar
  15. [SSG+91]
    A. Sernadas, C. Sernadas, P. Gouveia, P. Resende, and J. Gouveia. OBLOG — Object-Oriented Logic: An Informal Introduction. Technical Report, INESC, Lisbon, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. [SSS95]
    G. Saake, A. Sernadas, and C. Sernadas. Evolving Object Specifications. In Information Systems — Correctness and Reusability, pp. 84–99. World Scientific Publishing, 1995.Google Scholar
  17. [WJ95]
    M. J. Wooldridge and N. R. Jennings. Agents Theories, Architectures, and Languages: A Survey. In Intelligent Agents — Proc. ECAI'94 Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, pp. 1–39. Springer, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Can Türker
    • 1
  • Stefan Conrad
    • 1
  • Gunter Saake
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Technische InformationssystemeOtto-von-Guericke-Universität MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations