Tuple-Based Models in the Observation Framework
In this paper, we elaborate on modelling tuple-based coordination media in terms of observable sources providing coordination as a service. Only the medium’s part directly affecting its observable behaviour is explicitly represented, while its inner activity is represented only as a source for proactive behaviour, thus abstracting away from its details. As an example of this methodology, we formalise JavaSpaces’ time passing and leasing mechanisms, which are both modelled in terms of the medium’s inner activity. Then, the formalisation of tuple centres is also shown that emphasises the ability of our approach to deal with the explicit representation of complex coordination services.
KeywordsObservable Behaviour Spontaneous Move Coordination Model Proactive Behaviour Tuple Space
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.N. Busi, R. Gorrieri, and G. Zavattaro. Process calculi for Coordination: From Linda to JavaSpaces. In T. Rus, editor, 8th International Conference, AMAST 2000, volume 1816 of LNCS, pages 198–212. Springer-Verlag, 2000.Google Scholar
- 4.N. Busi and G. Zavattaro. On the expressiveness of event notification in data-driven coordination languages. In 9th European Symposium on Programming, volume 1782 of LNCS, pages 41–55. Springer-Verlag, 2000.Google Scholar
- 5.P. Ciancarini, K. K. Jensen, and D. Yankelevich. On the operational sematics of a coordination language. In P. Ciancarini, O. Nierstrask, and O. Yonezawa, editors, Object-Based Models and Languages for Concurrent Systems, volume 924 of LNCS, pages 77–106. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
- 6.R. De Nicola and R. Pugliese. A process algebra based on LINDA. In P. Cincarini and C. Hankin, editors, Coordination Languages and Models, volume 1061 of LNCS, pages 160–178. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
- 7.E. Denti, A. Natali, and A. Omicini. On the expressive power of a language for programming coordination media. In 1998 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC’98), pages 169–177, Atlanta (GA), 27 Feb.–1 Mar. 1998. ACM. Track on Coordination Models, Languages and Applications.Google Scholar
- 8.E. Freeman, S. Hupfer, and K. Arnold. JavaSpaces: Principles, Patterns, and Practice. The Jini Technology Series. Addison-Wesley, 1999.Google Scholar
- 10.A. Omicini. On the semantics of tuple-based coordination models. In 1999 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC’99), pages 175–182, San Antonio (TX), 28 Feb.–2 Mar. 1999. ACM. Track on Coordination Models, Languages and Applications.Google Scholar
- 12.K. Sycara. Multi-agent infrastructure, agent discovery, middle agents for Web services. In M. Luck, V. Mařík, O. Štěpánková, and R. Trappl, editors, Multi-Agent Systems and Applications, volume 2086 of LNAI, pages 17–49. Springer-Verlag, 2001.Google Scholar
- 13.M. Viroli, G. Moro, and A. Omicini. On observation as a coordination pattern: An ontology and a formal framework. In 16th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2001), pages 166–175, Las Vegas (NV), 11–14 Mar. 2001. ACM.Google Scholar
- 14.M. Viroli and A. Omicini. Multi-agent systems as composition of observable systems. In WOA 2001-Dagli oggetti agli agenti: tendenze evolutive dei sistemi software, Modena, Italy, 4-5 Sept. 2001. Pitagora Editrice Bologna.Google Scholar
- 15.M. Viroli and A. Omicini. Specifying agents’ observable behaviour. In 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Bologna, Italy, 15–19 July 2002. ACM.Google Scholar
- 16.L. D. Zuch and D. Gelernter. On what Linda is: Formal description of Linda as a reactive system. In D. Garlan and D. Le Métayer, editors, Coordination Languages and Models, volume 1282 of LNCS, pages 187–204. Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar