Performance Modeling and Analysis of the Universal Control Hub

  • Elena Gómez-Martínez
  • José Merseguer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6342)


People with special needs may find difficulties using electronic consumer devices, user interfaces limit their chances of having full control on them. The Universal Remote Control (URC) is an ISO standard that promotes pluggable and interoperable user interfaces to remotely operate electronic devices. The Universal Control Hub (UCH) is the software architecture that materialises URC, and several implementations are currently available. However, users and developers wonder about UCH feasibility to respond to future needs regarding performance. In this paper, we conduct a study to analyze whether UCH can face multiple concurrent users. Serious problems are exposed at this regard in this paper, they may contribute to question a solution that initially and from the interoperability point of view was very-well suited.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ajmone Marsan, M., Balbo, G., Conte, G., Donatelli, S., Franceschinis, G.: Modelling with Generalized Stochastic Petri Nets. John Wiley Series in Parallel Computing, Chichester (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Catalán, E., Catalán, M.: Performance Evaluation of the INREDIS framework. Technical report, Departament Enginyeria Telematica, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Davis, D., Parashar, M.: Latency Performance of SOAP Implementations. In: CCGRID, pp. 407–412. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elfwing, R., Paulsson, U., Lundberg, L.: Performance of SOAP in Web Service Environment Compared to CORBA. In: APSEC, p. 84. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eurostat. Statistical Office of European Union,
  7. 7.
    Gómez-Martínez, E., Ilarri, S., Merseguer, J.: Performance Analysis of Mobile Agents Tracking. In: Sixth International Workshop on Software and Performance (WOSP 2007), pp. 181–188. ACM, New York (February 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gómez-Martínez, E., Merseguer, J.: Impact of SOAP Implementations in the Performance of a Web Service-Based Application. In: Min, G., Di Martino, B., Yang, L.T., Guo, M., Rünger, G. (eds.) ISPA Workshops 2006. LNCS, vol. 4331, pp. 884–896. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Head, M.R., Govindaraju, M., Slominski, A., Liu, P., Abu-Ghazaleh, N., van Engelen, R., Chiu, K., Lewis, M.J.: A Benchmark Suite for SOAP-based Communication in Grid Web Services. In: SC, p. 19. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    IEEE. IEEE 1901 Draft Standard 3.0 for Broadband over Power Line Networks: Medium Access Control and Physical Layer Specifications (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    INREDIS. INterfaces for RElations between Environment and people with DISabilities,
  12. 12.
    INREDIS. Deliverable-78.2.1. Final Guide to a Generic Platform Deployment (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ISO. ISO 24752:2008 Information technology – User interfaces – Universal remote console – Part 1: Framework. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marques, C.K.M., Ilarri, S., Merseguer, J., Barroso, G.C.: Performance analysis of a dynamic architecture for reconfiguration of web servers clusters. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networking and Services (ICNS 2010), pp. 224–229 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller, R.B.: Response time in man-computer conversational transactions. In: AFIPS 1968 (Fall, part I): Proceedings of the December 9-11, 1968, Fall Joint Computer Conference, Part I, pp. 267–277. ACM, New York (1968)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Newell, A.F.: Accessible computing – past trends and future suggestions: Commentary on “computers and people with disabilities”. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 1(2) (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Object Management Group. UML Profile for Schedulabibity, Performance and Time Specification, Version 1.1 (January 2005),
  19. 19.
    Petriu, D., Woodside, M.: An intermediate metamodel with scenarios and resources for generating performance models from UML designs. Software and Systems Modeling 6(2), 163–184 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    URC Consortium,
  22. 22.
    URC Consortium. iPhone client for UCH (iUCH),
  23. 23.
    URC Consortium. Universal Control Hub for C++ (UCHe),
  24. 24.
    URC Consortium. Universal Control Hub for Java (UCHj),
  25. 25.
    Woodside, C.M., Petriu, D.C., Petriu, D.B., Shen, H., Israr, T., Merseguer, J.: Performance by unified model analysis (PUMA). In: WOSP, pp. 1–12 (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zimmermann, G., Vanderheiden, G.C.: The Universal Control Hub: An Open Platform for Remote User Interfaces in the Digital Home. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) HCI 2007. LNCS, vol. 4551, pp. 1040–1049. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Gómez-Martínez
    • 1
  • José Merseguer
    • 2
  1. 1.R & D DepartmentFundosa Technosite - ONCE FoundationMadridSpain
  2. 2.Dpto. de Informática e Ingeniería de SistemasUniversidad de ZaragozaZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations