S. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agent-based systems, 1999. 11  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....jmpui) The joint manager private interface only has relationships with the joint manager public interface or partners] 19 4. Software Qualities for Multi Agent Systems Generally the following software qualities are addressed to characterized multi agent system architectures: Predictability [60]. Autonomous components like agents have a high degree of autonomy [61] in the way that they undertake action and communication in their domains. It can be then di#cult to predict individual characteristics as part of determining the behavior of a distributed and open system at large. Generally, ....

....and responsive [13] agents must be predictable enough to anticipate and plan actions while being responsive and adaptive to unexpected situations. Security. Agents are often able to identify their own data and knowledge sources and they may undertake additional actions based on these sources [60]. Protocols and strategies for verifying authenticity for these data sources by individual agents are an important concern in the evaluation of overall system quality since, in addition to possibly misleading information acquired by agents, there is the danger of hostile external entities spoofing ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S.G. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agentbased systems. Technical Report CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA, 1999, 1999.

....using system qualities a multi agent architecture can or must support. The organizational patterns should eventually constitute an architectural macro level. At a micro level we will focus on the notion of social agent patterns such as the broker, matchmaker, embassy, mediator, wrapper, mediator [Hay99, Woo99]. They will detail how goals and dependencies identified in an organizational pattern can be reftned and achieved. ....

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

....= jmpui) The joint manager private interface only has relationships with the joint manager public interface or partners] 4. Software Qualities for Multi Agent Systems Generally the following software can be are addressed to characterized multi agent system architectures: Predictability [58]. Autonomous components like agents have a high degree of autonomy [59] in the way that they undertake action and communication in their domains. It can be then di#cult to predict individual characteristics as part of determining the behavior of a distributed and open system at large. Generally, ....

....and responsive [13] agents must be predictable enough to anticipate and plan actions while being responsive and adaptive to unexpected situations. Security. Agents are often able to identify their own data and knowledge sources and they may undertake additional actions based on these sources [58]. Protocols and strategies for verifying authenticity for these data sources by individual agents are an important concern in the evaluation of overall system quality since, in addition to possibly misleading information acquired by agents, there is the danger of hostile external entities spoofing ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S.G. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agentbased systems. Technical Report CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA, 1999, 1999.

....gathering from information sources, or connection setup. In the following, we present some social patterns that focus on social mechanisms recurrent in multi agent and cooperative systems literature; in particular, the following structures are inspired by the federated patterns introduced in [7, 18]. As with organizational styles, patterns are also metastructures that can be instantiated to model design a specific application context architecture (See Figure 12) A broker (Figure 9a) is an arbiter and intermediary who has access services of an actor (Provider) in order to satisfy the ....

Woods, S. G., and Barbacci, M. Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, USA, 1999.

....using system qualities a multi agent architecture can or must support. The organizational patterns should eventually constitute an architectural macro level. At a micro level we will focus on the notion of social agent patterns such as the broker, matchmaker, embassy, mediator, wrapper, mediator [Hay99, Woo99]. They will detail how goals and dependencies identified in an organizational pattern can be refined and achieved. ....

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

....host. Differently, in Tropos, multi agent patterns are used for solving a specific goal at organization level. In the following we present a micro level catalogue involving some multi agent pattern recurrent in multi agent literature; in particular, some of the federated patterns introduced in [Hay99, Woo99] we will use in Section 4. For lack of space, we do not use any particular template, but we simple describe the patterns giving a brief description and in some case modeling them with i . Consumer Provider Matchmaker Advertise Service Requested Service Locate Provider Monitor Change ....

....on patterns. Many existing patterns can be incorporated into system architecture, such as those identified in [Gam95, Pre95] For agent inherent characteristics, patterns for distributed, and open architectures like the broker, matchmaker, embassy, mediator, wrapper, mediator are more appropriate [Hay99, Woo99]. Agent capabilities for these patterns have been also introduced. Future research directions include formalizing precisely the organizational styles and agent patterns that have been identified, as well as the sense in which a particular model is an instance of such a style and pattern. We also ....

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. "Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative AgentBased Systems." Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

....level through the identification of organizational styles and 18 relevant quality attributes (softgoals) as discussed previously. We have defined a catalogue involving some social pattern recurrent in multiagent literature; in particular, some of the federated patterns introduced in [25,47]: broker, matchmaker, mediator, monitor, embassy, wrapper, contractnet. For instance, a matchmaker (Figure 10) locates a provider corresponding to a consumer request for service, and then gives the consumer a handle to the chosen provider directly. Contrary to the broker who directly handles all ....

S. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agentbased systems. Technical Report CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA, 1999.

....gathering from information sources, or connection setup. In the following, we present some social patterns that focus on social mechanisms recurrent in multi agent and cooperative systems literature; in particular, the following structures are inspired by the federated pattems introduced in [Hay99, Woo99]. As with organizational styles, patterns are also metastructures that can be instantiated to model design a specific application context architecture (See Figure 17) A broker (Figure 11) is an arbiter and intermediary who has access services of an actor (Provider) in order to satisfy the ....

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. "Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems". Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

....Wide Access to Market to Consumer Interest in Fig. 8. Vertical Integration 3 Evaluating Architecture The organizational styles defined in Section 2 can be evaluated and compared using the following software quality attributes identified for multi agent architectures: 1 Predictability [24]. Agents have a high degree of autonomy in the way that they undertake action and communication in their domains. It can be then difficult to predict individual characteristics as part of determining the behavior of a distributed and open system at large. 2 Security. Agents are often able to ....

....in their domains. It can be then difficult to predict individual characteristics as part of determining the behavior of a distributed and open system at large. 2 Security. Agents are often able to identify their own data sources and they may undertake additional actions based on these sources [24]. Protocols and strategies for verifying authenticity for these data sources by individual agents are an important concern in the evaluation of overall system quality since, in addition to possibly misleading information acquired by agents, there is the danger of hostile external entities spoofing ....

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, Carnegie Mellon University, USA, 1999.

.... Architecture The organizational styles defined in Section 2 can be evaluated and compared using the following software quality attributes identified for architectures involving coordinated autonomous components (e.g. Web, internet, agent or peer to peer software systems) 1 Predictability [15]. Autonomous components like agents have a high degree of autonomy in the way that they undertake action and communication in their domains. It can be then difficult to predict individual characteristics as part of determining the behavior of a distributed and open system at large. 2 Security. ....

....It can be then difficult to predict individual characteristics as part of determining the behavior of a distributed and open system at large. 2 Security. Autonomous components are often able to identify their own data sources and they may undertake additional actions based on these sources [15]. Protocols and strategies for verifying authenticity for these data sources by individual components are an important concern in the evaluation of overall system quality since, in addition to possibly misleading information acquired by components, there is the danger of hostile external entities ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

....architectural level through the identification of organizational styles and relevant quality attributes (softgoals) as discussed previously. We have defined a catalogue involving some social pattern recurrent in multiagent literature; in particular, some of the federated patterns introduced in [24,47]: broker, matchmaker, mediator, monitor, embassy, wrapper, contractnet. For instance, a matchmaker (Figure 12) locates a provider corresponding to a consumer request for service, and then gives the consumer a handle to the chosen provider directly. Contrary to the broker who directly handles all ....

S. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agentbased systems. Technical Report CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA, 1999, 1999.

....gathering from information sources, or connection setup. In the following, we present some social patterns that focus on social mechanisms recurrent in multi agent and cooperative systems literature; in particular, the following structures are inspired by the federated patterns introduced in [Hay99, Woo99]. As with organizational styles, patterns are also metastructures that can be instantiated to model design a specific application context architecture (See Figure 18) A broker (Figure 12) is an arbiter and intermediary who has access services of an actor (Provider) in order to satisfy the ....

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. "Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems". Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

....related to usability, security, availability, reusability, evolvability, extensibility, reusability, Due to the organizational nature of multi agent systems, we have found the following non functional requirements relevant for architectural evaluation when deploying a MAS. Predictability [Woo99]. Agents have a high degree of autonomy in the way that they undertake action and communication in their domains. It can be then difficult to predict individual characteristics such as timeliness and latency as part of determining the behavior of a multi agent system at large. Security. Agents ....

....can be then difficult to predict individual characteristics such as timeliness and latency as part of determining the behavior of a multi agent system at large. Security. Agents are often able to identify their own data sources and they may undertake additional actions based on these sources [Woo99]. Protocols and strategies for verifying authenticity for these data sources by individual agents are an important concern in the evaluation of overall system quality since, in addition to possibly misleading information acquired by agents, there is the danger of hostile external agents spoofing ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. G. Woods and M. Barbacci. "Architectural Evaluation of Collaborative Agent-Based Systems." Technical Report, CMU/SEI-99-TR-025, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA, 1999.

No context found.

S. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agent-based systems, 1999. 11

No context found.

S. Woods and M. Barbacci. Architectural evaluation of collaborative agent-based systems, 1999. 11

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC