Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T06:08:31.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Communication infrastructure for concurrent engineering

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Daniel R. Kuokka  and
Larry T. Harada
Daniel R. Kuokka
Affiliation:
Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratories, 3251 Hanover Street, Palo Alto, CA 94304–1191, U.S.A.
Larry T. Harada
Affiliation:
Lockheed Palo Alto Research Laboratories, 3251 Hanover Street, Palo Alto, CA 94304–1191, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Integrating multiple engineering perspectives is critical to designing ever more complex products, but this introduces great potential for miscommunication leading to design conflicts. The SHADE (SHAred Dependency Engineering) project is defining agent infrastructure technology that supports dynamic, knowledge-based communication among heterogeneous engineering tools, collaboration systems, and conflict management systems. Building on technologies for defining a shared formal vocabulary and protocols for exchanging information, SHADE is developing facilitators that assist in locating and disseminating information. The result is a flexible infrastructure that helps existing engineering tools work together more effectively, and that supports a variety of new conflict management approaches. This article outlines the facilitation and application agents created by SHADE, and provides an in-depth example of their application to an engineering task.

Keywords

AgentsCommunication InfrastructureConcurrent EngineeringConstraint SatisfactionKnowledge Representation
Type
Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , September 1995 , pp. 283 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bahler, D., Dupont, C., & Bowen, J. (1995). A mixed quantitative/qualitative method for evaluating compromise solutions to conflicts in collaborative design. AIDAM 9(4), 325–336.Google Scholar
Cutkosky, M., Engelmore, R., Fikes, R., Gruber, T., Genesereth, M., Mark, W., Tenenbaum, J., & Weber, J. (1993). PACT: An experiment in integrating concurrent engineering systems. IEEE Computer 26(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finin, T., Weber, J., Wiederhold, G., Genesereth, M., Fritzson, R., McGuire, J., McKay, D., Shapiro, S., Pelavin, R., & Beck, C. (1993). Specification of the KQML agent communication language. Official Document of the DARPA Knowledge Sharing Initiative's External Interfaces Working Group. Also available as an Enterprise Integration Technologies, Inc. Tech. Report.Google Scholar
Genesereth, M. (1992). An agent-based framework for software interoperability. In Proc. DARPA Software Technology Conference. Meridian Corporation, Arlington, VA. Also Computer Science Department, Stanford University Tech. Rep. Logic-92–2.Google Scholar
Genesereth, M., & Fikes, R. (1992). Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Computer Science Department, Stanford University. Tech. Rep. Logic-92–1.Google Scholar
Gruber, T. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, T.R., & Olsen, G.R. (1994). An ontology for engineering mathematics. In Fourth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. (Doyle, J., Torasso, P., & Sandewall, E., Eds.) Morgan Kaufmann, Gustav Stresemann Institut, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
Klein, M. (1991). Supporting Conflict Resolution in Cooperative Design Systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 21(6), 1379–1390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuokka, D. (1990). The deliberative integration of planning, execution, and learning. Carnegie Mellon University Computer Science Department Ph.D. Thesis.Google Scholar
Kuokka, D., Harada, L., Weber, J., Tenenbaum, J., Gruber, T., & Olsen, G. (1994). SHADE: Knowledge-Based Technology for the Re-Engineering Problem (Final Report). Lockheed Artificial Intelligence Center Tech. Report.Google Scholar
Kuokka, D., & Harada, L. (1995a). Matchmaking for information agents. Interna. Joint Conf. Artif. Intell.Google Scholar
Kuokka, D., & Harada, L. (1995b). On using KQML for matchmaking. First. Int. Conf. Muliagent Systems.Google Scholar
Kuokka, D., & Livezey, B. (1994). A collaborative parametric design agent. Nat. Conf. Artif. Intell. (AAAI).Google Scholar
Lander, S.E., & Lesser, V.R. (1993). Organizing cooperative search among heterogeneous expert agents. In Working Notes of AI in Collaborative Design, Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (Gero, J.S. & Maher, M.L., Eds.). AAAI-93, pp. 89–101.Google Scholar
Mark, W., & Dukes-Schlossberg, J. (1994). The cosmos system for distributed design negotiation support. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications 2(3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, J.G., Kuokka, D.R., Weber, J.C., Tenenbaum, J.M., Gruber, T.R., & Olsen, G.R. (1993). SHADE: Technology for knowledge-based collaborative engineering. J. Concurrent Engineering: Applications and Research (CERA) 1(3).Google Scholar
Neches, R., Fikes, R., Finin, T., Gruber, T., Patil, R., Senator, T., – Swartout, W. (1991). Enabling technology for knowledge sharing, AI Magazine 12(3).Google Scholar
Patil, R., Fikes, R., Patel-Schneider, P., McKay, D., Finin, T., Gruber, T., & Neche, R. (1992). “The DARPA knowledge sharing effort: Progress report” In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Third International Conference, (Rich, C., Nebel, B., & Swartout, W., Eds.), Morgan Kaufmann, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Petrie, C. (1993). Design space navigation as a collaborative aid. In Working Notes of AI in Collaborative Design, Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-93, pp. 107–115.Google Scholar
Salton, G., (Ed.). (1971). The smart information retrieval system-Experiments in automatic document processing. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
Sycara, K. (1989). Argumentation: Planning other agents' plans. In Proc. the Eleventh Interna. Joint Conf. Artif. Intell., 517–523.Google Scholar
Toye, G., Cutkosky, M., Leifer, L., Tenenbaum, J., & Glicksman, J. (1993). “SHARE: A methodology and environment for collaborative product development” Stanford Center for Design Res. Tech. Rep. 1993–0420.Google Scholar