Result sharing among agents using reactive rules

  • M. Berndtsson
  • S. Chakravarthy
  • B. Lings
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1202)


This paper critically analyse the use of active databases as an enabling technology for result sharing as defined in the DAI literature. In particular, we demostrate how ECA (Event-Condition-Action) rules can be used for supporting result shared cooperation. Further, we demonstrate how composite events as defined within active databases can help a problem solving agent to precisely specify when to take responsive action to multiple result notifications.


Active databases result sharing cooperative problem solving 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    E. Anwar, L. Maugis, and S Chakravarthy. A new perspective on rule support for object-oriented databases. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Data, pages 99–108, May 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Barbuceanu and M.S. Fox. Capturing and Modelling Coordination Knowledge for Multi-Agent Systems. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 5(2–3):275–314, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Berndtsson. Reactive Object-Oriented Databases and CIM. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Database and Expert System Applications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 769–778. Springer-Verlag, September 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Berndtsson, S. Chakravarthy, and B. Lings. Coordination Among Agents Using Reactive Rules. Technical Report HS-IDA-TR-96-011, Department of Computer Science, University of Skövde, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Berndtsson and B. Lings. On Developing Reactive Object-Oriented Databases. IEEE Quarterly Bulletin on Data Engineering, Special Issue on Active Databases, 15(1–4):31–34, December 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Buchmann, J. Zimmermann, J. Blakelyand, and D. Wells. Building an integrated active oodbms: Requirements, architecture, and design decisions. In Proc. of IEEE Data Engineering, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Chakravarthy and D. Mishra. Snoop: An Expressive Event Specification Language For Active Databases. Technical Report UF-CIS Technical Report TR-93-007, University of Florida, 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The ACT-NET Consortium. The Active Database Management System Manifesto: A Rulebase of ADBMS Features. ACM Sigmod Record, 25(3), September 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    U. Dayal. Ten Years of Activity in Active Database Systems: What Have We Accomplished? In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Active and Real-Time Database Systems (ARTDB-95), Workshops in Computing, pages 3–22. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Eriksson. CEDE: Composite Event Detector in an Active Object-Oriented Database. Master's thesis, University of Skövde, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    T. Finin, R. Fritzson, D. McKay, and R. McEntire. Kqml — an information and knowledge exchange protocol. In Kazuhiro Fuchi and Toshio Yokoi, editors, Knowledge Building and Knowledge Sharing. Ohmsha and IOS Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Gatziu and K. Dittrich. Events in an active object oriented database system. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop of Rules in Database Systems, pages 23–29, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    N. Gehani, H. V. Jagadish, and O Smueli. Event specification in an active object-oriented database. In Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 81–90, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L.E. Hall. user design issues for distributed artificial intelligence. In G.M.P. O'Hare and N.R. Jennings, editors, Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence, chapter 21, pages 543–556. Wiley-Interscience, 1996.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    John R. Hartley, editor. Concurrent Engineering: Shortening Lead Times, Raising Quality, and Lowering Costs. Productivity Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    N. R. Jennings. The ARCHON System and its Applications. In Proceedings of the CKBS-SIG Workshop on Cooperating Knowledge Based Systems, pages 13–30, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. R. Kuokka, J. C. Weber, and et al. Shade: Knowledge-Based Technology for the Re-Engineering problem. Technical report, Lockhead Palo Alto Research Laboratories, 1993. Annual Report.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D.R. Kuokka and L.T. Harada. Issues and extensions for information matchmaking protocols. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 5(2–3):251–274, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Y. Labrou and T. Finin. A semantics approach for kqml — a general purpose communication language for software agents. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM'94), 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. G. Smith and R. Davis. Frameworks for cooperation in distributed problem solving. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1981.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R.G. Smith. The Contract Net Protocol: High Level Communication and Control in a Distributed Problem Solver. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-10(12), December 1980.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Widom and S. Ceri, editors. Active Database Systems: Triggers and Rules for Advanced Database Processing. Morgan Kufmann Publisher, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Berndtsson
    • 1
  • S. Chakravarthy
    • 2
  • B. Lings
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of SkövdeSkövdeSweden
  2. 2.Database Systems Research and Development Center, Computer and Information Science and Engineering DepartmentUniversity of FloridaGainesville
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of ExeterExeterUK

Personalised recommendations