Agnostic Informatics System of Systems: The Open ISoS Services Framework

  • A. Luis OsórioEmail author
  • Adam Belloum
  • Hamideh Afsarmanesh
  • Luis M. Camarinha-Matos
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 506)


The upward integration endeavor is making informatics systems (I-systems) increasingly complex. The modeling techniques, methodologies, development strategies, deployment and execution environment, maintenance and evolution, and governance, to mention just a few aspects are making the resulted (un)integrated informatics technology system a vendor lock-in landscape. The relation between informatics science and engineering and the organization’s business or control processes automation, or services provisioning and adaptation, has demonstrated to be difficult to converge to a common understanding of clear computational responsibility borders. Existing approaches and standards fail to be complete with respect to establishing a landscape of informatics technology under vendor agnostic model (lock-in free). In this context, this paper extends previous research by proposing an organization´s level modularity framework aiming at formally identifying an agnostic, and open informatics system of systems (ISoS). A definition of its components is provided, and a validation case study is discussed.


Complex informatics system Open modularity framework Collaborative networks Integrated I-system of systems 



This work has been partially supported by Administration of the Port of Lisbon and Leixões through the MIELE project, A-to-B (former Brisa Innovation and Technology), through a yearly research grant, Galpgest and BP through the Horus project and ANSR (National Road Security Authority) through the SINCRO project. Partial support also from FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia within the research unit CTS – Center of Technology and Systems (project UID/EEA/00066/2013).


  1. 1.
    Afsarmanesh, H., Camarinha-Matos, L.M.: A framework for management of virtual organization breeding environments. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H., Ortiz, A. (eds.) PRO-VE 2005. IFIPAICT, vol. 186, pp. 35–48. Springer, Boston, MA (2005). doi: 10.1007/0-387-29360-4_4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahn, K.: The study of single window model for maritime logistics. In: 2010 6th International Conference on Advanced Information Management and Service (IMS), pp. 106–111 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biffl, S., Schatten, A.: A platform for service-oriented integration of software engineering environments. In: Proceeding of the 2009 Conference on New Trends in Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques: SoMeT 2009, pp. 75–92. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bogner, J., Zimmermann, A.: Towards integrating microservices with adaptable enterprise architecture. In: 2016 IEEE 20th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW), pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Butz, H.: Open integrated modular avionic (IMA): State of the art and future development road map at airbus deutschland. Department of Avionic Systems at Airbus Deutschland GmbH (2004).
  6. 6.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C.: The history of the grid. 20(21), 22 (2010).
  7. 7.
    Foster, I., Kesselman, C., Tuecke, S.: The anatomy of the grid: enabling scalable virtual organizations. Int. J. High Perform. Comput. Appl. 15(3), 200–222 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heinrich, T.: Standard wars, tied standards, and network externality induced path dependence in the ICT sector. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 81, 309–320 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huxtable, J., Schaefer, D.: On servitization of the manufacturing industry in the UK. In: Procedia CIRP, The Sixth International Conference on Changeable, Agile, Reconfigurable and Virtual Production (CARV2016), vol. 52, pp. 46–51 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ISO_IEC_IEEE_42010: Systems and software engineering–architecture description; survey of architecture frameworks, January 2017Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Joachim, N., Beimborn, D., Weitzel, T.: The influence of SOA governance mechanisms on IT flexibility and service reuse. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 22(1), 86–101 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee, C.A., Desai, N., Brethorst, A.: A keystone-based virtual organization management system. In: 2014 IEEE 6th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science, pp. 727–730 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lewis, J., Fowler, M.: Microservices a definition of this new architectural term, March 2014.
  14. 14.
    Long, A.: Port community systems. World Customs J. 3(1), 63–67 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Habich, D., Lehner, W., Bohm, M., Bittner, J., Wloka, U.: Model-driven generation of dynamic adapters for integration platforms. In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Model Driven Interoperability for Sustainable Information Systems (MDISIS 2008), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 340, pp. 105–119, June 2008.
  16. 16.
    Mikkola, J.H.: Modularity and interface management of product architectures. In: Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, PICMET 2001, vol. 2(Supplement), pp. 599–609 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mikkola, J.H.: Modularity and interface management: the case of Schindler elevators. In: IVS/CBS Working Papers 2001-6, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy, Copenhagen Business School (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Myburgh, A.: Situational software engineering complex adaptive responses of software development teams. In: 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), pp. 841–850, September 2014Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Olliffe, G.: Microservices: building services with the guts on the outside, January 2015.
  20. 20.
    OMG-MOF. Meta object facility (MOF), November 2016Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    OMG-SEMAT. Omg_semat-essence-kernel and language for software engineering methods-v1.1. Web, December 2015Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Osório, A.L., Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H.: Cooperation enabled systems for collaborative networks. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Pereira-Klen, A., Afsarmanesh, H. (eds.) PRO-VE 2011. IFIPAICT, vol. 362, pp. 400–409. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23330-2_44 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Osório, A.L., Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H.: Enterprise collaboration network for transport and logistics services. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Scherer, R.J. (eds.) PRO-VE 2013. IFIPAICT, vol. 408, pp. 267–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-40543-3_29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Osório, A.L.: Towards vendor-agnostic IT-system of IT-systems with the CEDE platform. In: Afsarmanesh, H., Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Lucas Soares, A. (eds.) PRO-VE 2016. IFIPAICT, vol. 480, pp. 494–505. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-45390-3_42 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Osório, A.L., Abrantes, A.J., Gonçalves, J.C., Araújo, P., Machado, J.M., Jacquet, G.C., Gomes, J.S.: Flexible and plugged peer systems integration to ITS-IBUS: the case of EFC and LPR systems. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H. (eds.) PRO-VE 2003. ITIFIP, vol. 134, pp. 231–240. Springer, Boston, MA (2004). doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-35704-1_24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Osório, L.A., Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H.: ECoNet platform for collaborative logistics and transport. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Bénaben, F., Picard, W. (eds.) PRO-VE 2015. IFIPAICT, vol. 463, pp. 265–276. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24141-8_24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sydow, J., Windeler, A., Müller-Seitz, G., Lange, K.: Path constitution analysis: a methodology for understanding path dependence and path creation. Bus. Res. 5(2), 155–176 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tegueu, F.S., Abdellatif, S., Villemur, T., Berthou, P., Plesse, T.: Towards application driven networking. In: 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Local and Metropolitan Area Networks (LANMAN), pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    West, J.: Seeking open infrastructure: Contrasting open standards, open source and open innovation. First Monday 12(6) (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zahariadis, T., Papadakis, A., Alvarez, F., Gonzalez, J., Lopez, F., Facca, F., Al-Hazmi, Y.: FIWARE Lab: managing resources and services in a cloud federation supporting future internet applications. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/ACM 7th International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing, UCC 2014, pp. 792–799. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Luis Osório
    • 1
    Email author
  • Adam Belloum
    • 2
  • Hamideh Afsarmanesh
    • 2
  • Luis M. Camarinha-Matos
    • 3
  1. 1.ISEL - Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa, Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa, and POLITEC&IDLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.University of Amsterdam (UvA)AmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Faculty of Sciences and Technology and Uninova-CTSNOVA University of LisbonMonte CaparicaPortugal

Personalised recommendations