Towards an Evaluation Framework for MAS Software Engineering

  • Emilia Garcia
  • Adriana Giret
  • Vicente Botti
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5357)


Recently a great number of methods and frameworks to develop multiagent systems have appeared. It makes difficult the selection between one and another. Because of that the evaluation of multiagent system software engineering techniques is an open research topic. This paper presents a questionnaire for evaluating and comparing development methods and tools.


Multiagent systems software engineering development tools 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bitting, E., Carter, J., Ghorbani, A.A.: Multiagent System Development Kits: An Evaluation. In: Proc. CNSR 2003, May 15-16, pp. 80–92 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dam, K.H.: Evaluating and Comparing Agent-Oriented Software Engineering Methodologies. Master’s thesis, RMIT University, Australia (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garcia, E., Giret, A., Botti, V.: Evaluating mas engineering tools. In: International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering, pp. 181–1874 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garcia, E., Giret, A., Botti, V.: On the evaluation of mas development tools. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Theory and Practice (IFIP AI 2008). Springer, Boston (in press, 2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin, C., Kavi, K.M., Sheldon, F.T., Daley, K.M., Abercrombie, R.K.: A methodology to evaluate agent oriented software engineering techniques. In: HICSS 2007, p. 60. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rafael, M.D., Bordini, H., Winikoff, M.: Current issues in multi-agent systems development. In: Post-proceedings of the Seventh Annual International Workshop on Engineering Societies in the Agents World, pp. 38–61 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sturm, A., Shehory, O.: A framework for evaluating agent-oriented methodologies. In: Giorgini, P., Henderson-Sellers, B., Winikoff, M. (eds.) AOIS 2003. LNCS, vol. 3030, pp. 94–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sudeikat, J., Braubach, L., Pokahr, A., Lamersdorf, W.: Evaluation of agent-oriented software methodologies examination of the gap between modeling and platform. In: Odell, J.J., Giorgini, P., Müller, J.P. (eds.) AOSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3382, pp. 126–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tran, Q., Low, G.: Comparison of ten agent-oriented methodologies. In: Henderson-Sellers, B., Giorgini, P. (eds.) Agent-Oriented Methodologies, pp. 341–367. Idea Group Publishing (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wooldridge, M., Ciancarini, P.: Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: The State of the Art. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1957, pp. 1–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xue, X., Zeng, J., Liding, L.: Towards an engineering change in agent oriented software engineering. In: ICICIC 2006: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control, pp. 225–228. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emilia Garcia
    • 1
  • Adriana Giret
    • 1
  • Vicente Botti
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Politecnica de ValenciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations