Application form 2001

 

Project number

 

 

 

For Research Council use

1 Project title (max. 100 characters)

MOWAHS – Mobile Work Across Heterogeneous Systems

 

 

2 Applicant

Institution/company

Responsible for the project

 

Project manager

Institution/Company (name)

IDI

Project manager (name)

Reidar Conradi

Faculty/Institute/
Department

FIM

   

Address

NTNU

Address

IDI, NTNU

City and city code

7491 Trondheim

   

Web-site

idi@idi.ntnu.no

   

Registration number

974 767 880

City and city code

7491 Trondheim

Auditor

Office of auditor general

 

Other

 

Position/title

Professor

Administrative responsiblility (name)

Kjell Bratbergsengen

Academic degree

Dr.Ing.

Position/title

Prof., instituttleder

Preferred language

Bokmål

x

Nynorsk

 

Phone and fax

73 59 34 39

73 59 44 66

Phone and fax

73 59 34 44

73 59 44 66

E-mail

kjell.bratbergsengen@idi.ntnu.no

E-mail

reidar.conradi@idi.ntnu.no

 

3 Principal objective and sub-goals (max. 1000 words)

 

The project goals are threefold:

 

  1. Helping to understand and to continuously assess and improve workprocesses in virtual organizations.
  2. Providing a flexible, common work environment to execute and share real workprocesses and their artifacts,
    applicable on a variety of electronic devices (from big servers to small PDAs).
  3. Disseminating the results to colleagues, students, companies, and the community at large.

 

 

4 Project summary (max. 200 words)

 

The project will provide an efficient and user-friendly environment for helping people in virtual organizations to perform and coordinate
their work at their current location, time and device configurations.

 

The project will be based around two existing research groups at IDI / NTNU – i.e. the software engineering and database research groups. Currently the two groups have in all 8 professors / researchers, 12 PhD students and 25 MSc students.

 

The project is planned for 4 years with 1.5 PhD student and 1 postdoc researcher on average per year. Its size will be

8251 KNOK – with 5000 KNOK on NFR (977 KNOK for 2001) and 3251 KNOK on IDI (500 KNOK for 2001).

 

Some keywords are: Virtual organizations, process models, mobile agents, heterogeneous systems, federated and distributed systems, distributed workspaces, cooperative transactions, XML.

 

5 Research Council funding division

Division

NT

Other relevant divisions

 

Programme

IKT-2010

Other relevant
programmes/disciplines

 

Discipline/

specialist field

 

For additional funding:

Give project number.

 

 

Executive officer

Activity

Project type

Division

BF

MU

MH

 

Discipline code

 

IE

NT

KS

   

 

 

 

Page 2

Project no.

 

6 Time table for main activities in the project

Project period: From:

01.01.01

To:

31.12.04

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Main activities over the project period

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

Establish an initial MOWAHS system

X

--

--

X

                               

Experiment with and adjust the initial system iteratively

       

X

--

--

X

                       

Conduct a first external review

             

X

                       

Establish, experiment with and adjust a refined MOWAHS system

X

--

--

X

Consolidation of results and wrap-up of PhD-theses

                       

X

-

-

X

       

Conduct a second external review

                         

X

           

Generic knowledge dissemination

   

X

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

-

-

-

X

       

Manage workshops on virtual organizations

       

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

         

 

7 Overall costs (in 1000 NOK)

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Sum

Personnel costs and indirect costs

1407

2823

2287

1334

 

7851

Purchase of R&D services

           

Equipment

50

50

     

100

Other operating costs

20

130

80

70

 

300

Project total

1477

3003

2367

1404

 

8251

 

Specifications (of costs)

 

Other operating costs are as follows:

 

Category 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total

 

Seminars / courses 25 25 50

Travel, project guests 25 25 50

Travel, project participants 20 80 80 20 200

 

Total 20 130 80 70 300

 

The equipment costs have not been specified any further.

 

 

 

 

8 Finance plan (in 1000 NOK)

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Sum

Own funding

500

917

917

917

 

3251

EU-funding

           

Other public-sector funding

           

Other private funding

           

From Research Council

977

2086

1450

487

 

5000

Project total

1477

3003

2367

1404

 

8251

 

9 Cost code (type of partner, in %)

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Commercial participants

         

R&D Institute sector

         

University sector

         

Other sectors

         

Project total

         

 

Notice: Project total for sections 7 and 8 should be the same for each individual year

 

 

Page 3

Project no.

10 Research Council application

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Sum

R

Student fellowship

           

A

Doctoral fellowships

397

834

834

417

 

2482

T

Post-doctoral fellowships

510

1072

536

   

2118

E

Fellowships for visiting researchers

           

S

Overseas fellowships

           
 

Technical/administrative positions

           
 

Research positions

           
 

Hourly-based salary including indirect costs

           
 

Sum personnel costs and indirect costs

907

1906

1370

417

 

4600

Purchase of R&D services (specified in sect. 7)

 

Equipment (specified in section 7)

50

50

     

100

 

Other operating costs (specified in section 7)

20

130

80

70

 

300

 

From Research Council

977

2086

1450

487

 

5000

 

11 Person for whom a fellowship/position is being sought

Name

Personal number

(if applicable)

Type position/fellowship

Period

Position-

%

A

         

B

         

C

         

Cost rates for calculation of fellowships abroad and rates for guest researchers (period is specified above)

Foreign institution: (name, address, country)

   
     
     
 

Travelling alone

 

Travelling expenses

 
 

Travelling with family

     

 

12 Active cooperation partners

 

 

 

 

 

13 Project publication plan

Dissemination of project results and contact with other projects are threefold:

 

Traditional international contact through conference presentations and university visits.

New, national, semi-annual workshop series on virtual organizations (jointly with other IKT 2010 projects).

New and revised course and lecture material.

 

 

14 List of enclosures

The application documents are specified as follows:

Application form, pages 1-3.

Appendix 1) Accompanying letter, pages 4-5. (In Norwegian)

Appendix 2) Project description, pages 6-35.

Appendix 3) CV’s and publication lists, pages 36-46.

 

 

15 Signatures

Kjell Bratbergsengen Reidar Conradi

 

Date 02.10.2000 Adm. responsible

Date 02.10.00 Project manager

Date: GrantApplicant

 

 

NTNU Fakultet for fysikk,

Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige informatikk og matematikk

universitet

Institutt for datateknikk og

informasjonsvitenskap

 

 

Prof. Reidar Conradi og Prof. Mads Nygård Trondheim, 14. juni, 2000 – rev. 2. oktober, 2000
Inst. for datateknikk og informasjonsvitenskap
NTNU, 7491 TRONDHEIM
Tlf: 73.593444 (rc), 73.593470 (mn), Fax: 73.594466,
El-post: reidar.
conradi@idi.ntnu.no , mads.nygaard@idi.ntnu.no

 

Norges Forskningsråd
IKT-2010 Program -- Område for Naturvitenskap og teknologi
P.B. 2700 -- St.Hanshaugen, 0131 Oslo Ref.: 230/00/RC/MN

 

Vedlegg 1: Følgebrev til søknad om
MObile Work Across Heterogeneous Systems (MOWAHS) for 2001-2004:

MOWAHS foreslås herved av faggruppene program/systemutvikling ("software engineering'') og databasesystemer ved IDI, NTNU. NFR-rammen er på 5000 KNOK over fire år (977 KNOK i år 2001), pluss 3251 KNOK (500 KNOK i år 2001) dekket av kapitaliserte universitetsmidler. Fra NFR søkes om 1 post-doc og 1.5 dr.stipendiat i snitt per år, med en fordeling på 2, 4, 3 og 1 personer over de fire årene (dvs. post-doc overlapp i 2.året og dr.stipendiat overlapp i 2. og 3. året). Aktuelle kandidater til slike post-docs er CAGIS-stipendiater som fullfører i 2000-2001.

MOWAHS kan ses på som en naturlig etterfølger av deler av CAGIS-prosjektet i 1997-2001. MOWAHS fokuserer på å støtte distribuerte og mobile brukere i å etablere en effektiv samarbeidskontekst, oppå eksisterende teknologiplattformer (immobil PC, portabel PC, PDA osv.). Utprøving og validering vil primært skje i studentprosjekter ved NTNU.

MOWAHS faller inn under IKT-2010-programmets generelle fagprofil og intensjon. MOWAHS faller dessuten inn under følgende underområder som prioriteres i denne søknadsrunden: heterogenitet og mobilitet, adaptivitet/rekonfigurerbarhet, tjeneste/systemkvalitet (delvis) og komponent-baserte systemer (litt her også).

MOWAHS søkes internasjonalt koplet med vårt nett av faglige kontakter, f.eks. mot universitetene i Lund, Grenoble, Aachen, Manchester og Lancaster og Politecnico di Milano. Bl.a. deltar vi i nettverket ISERN (Int'l Software Research Experimentation Network, initiert av prof. Basili og Rombach) som kan brukes for å støtte validering.

Vi beklager at søknaden er blitt lang. Dette skyldes at vi for egen del ønsket å lage et solid fundament for videre arbeid. Fratrukket innholdsfortegnelse, state-of-the-art og referanseliste, samt CVer og publikasjons-lister, er imidlertid prosjektbeskrivelsen på 14 sider, mot de anbefalte 10. Ønsket tidspunkt for prosjekt-oppstart er 01.01.2001.

 

Vennlig hilsen

Reidar Conradi / Mads Nygård

Vedlegg ''0'': Prosjektsøknadsskjema på vanlig måte, 3 sider.
Vedlegg 1: Følgebrev (dette brevet), s. 4-5.
Vedlegg 2: Prosjektbeskrivelse, s. 6-35 (inkl. 16 s. m/ innholdsfortegnelse, state-of-the-art, og ref.liste).
Vedlegg 3: CV'er og egne publikasjonslister, s. 36-46.

 

Mulige evaluatorer (review'ere) kan være:

 

Prof. Ian Sommerville,

Department of Computing, University of Lancaster

Engineering Building, SECAM, Fyld Avenue, Bailrigg

Lancaster LA1 4YR, UK

Phone: +44 1524 593.795, Fax: +44 1524 593.608, is@comp.lancs.ac.uk

Phone: +44 1524 824.358 (home phone)

 

Prof. dr. Markku Oivo

VTT Electronics

Kaitovayla 1, P.O. Box 1100

FIN-90571 Oulu,

FINLAND

Tel. +358 8 551 2460, GSM +358 40 548 3626

Fax +358 8 551 2320, markku.oivo@vtt.fi

 

Prof. Alfonso Fuggetta

Dipartimento di Elettronica

Politecnico di Milano

Piazza Leonardo Da Vinci 32

I-20133 Milano

ITALY

Fax +39-02-2399-3411 (at Politecnico)

Phone +39-02-2399-3623 (secr. Laura),

+39-02-2399.3540 (af), fuggetta@ELET.POLIMI.IT

 

Prof. Pierre-Yves Cunin

Laboratoire LSR

Institut Imag, Universite Joseph Fourier

Bat. C, 220 rue de la Chimie

Domaine Universitaire, BP 53

F-38041 Grenoble Cedex 9,

France

Tel: +33 476.635565, Fax: +33 476.635550, Pierre-Yves.Cunin@imag.fr

 

Prof. Brian Warboys

Dept. of Computer Science

Univ. of Manchester

Oxford Road

Manchester M13 9PL

United Kingdom

Phone +44 161 275 6182, Fax +44 161-275 6236, brian@cs.man.ac.uk

Secretary (Ferzana) phone +44 161 275 6248.

 

 

 

Enclosure 2: Project Description

 

MOWAHS --
MObile Work Across Heterogeneous Systems;
A research proposal for 2001-2004

 

Reidar Conradi and Mads Nygård, NTNU

IDI/NTNU, June 14 / October 2, 2000

    1. Contents

Contents *

1. Summary of MOWAHS: MObile Work Across Heterogeneous Systems *

2. Goals *

3. Results *

4. Resources *

5. Background and Previous Work *

5.1. Motivation *

5.2. State of the art *

5.2.1. Middleware: Web technologies, Distributed objects, and Agents. *

5.2.2. Process Modeling Languages and Process-centered Software Engineering Environments (PMLs/PSEEs) *

5.2.3. Process support for cooperative work *

5.2.4. Novel transaction models *

6. Focus and Approach *

6.1. General position *

6.2. A possible usage scenario for mobile processes and cooperating workspaces *

6.3. The more detailed, initial MOWAHS requirements *

6.4. Technology platform, the start position *

7. Workplan *

7.1. General set-up *

7.2. General phasing and work structure *

7.3. WP1. Project Management *

7.4. WP2. Technological Support *

7.5. WP3. Empirical Studies (for result R4) *

7.6. WP4: Dissemination and Contact (for result R5) *

8. Partner Description *

8.1. IDI software engineering group: closer description *

8.2. IDI database group: closer description *

9. Associated Activities and Projects *

10. References to Sections 2--9 *

11. Enclosure 3: Curriculum Vitaes and Publication Lists *

11.1. CV for Reidar Conradi, software engineering group *

11.2. CV for M. Letizia Jaccheri, software engineering group *

11.3. CV for Mads Nygård, database group *

11.4. Publication List for software engineering group *

11.5. Publication List for database group *

 

  1. Summary of MOWAHS: MObile Work Across Heterogeneous Systems
  2. Specific IKT-2010 program relevance: heterogeneity and mobility (overall), adaptivity/reconfigurability, quality of service / system quality (partly), and component-based systems (somewhat).

    The Internet now has 400 million users. It is expected to be 3 billion mobile phones world-wide in 2004, and 1/10 of these will have Internet access and be attached to powerful computers (source: IDC). More and more companies are therefore working as virtual organizations, where people are distributed over several locations and time zones. That is, distributed, mobile and partly asynchronous technology enables sharing of documents and work plans. However, the infrastructure and tools for carrying out projects in virtual organizations are immature. We must deal with a heterogeneity of tools, equipments (laptops, PDAs, mobile phones) and work models. In addition, mobility of devices and partial lack of connectivity require regular synchronization of such devices against stationary servers and PCs.

    A research challenge is therefore to provide an efficient and user-friendly environment for helping people in virtual organizations to perform and coordinate their work at their current location, time and device configurations.

    The support technologies for the above is in an enormous flux of development. Thus, a research project with 5-6 researchers must pursue a limited set of achievable subtasks. By building on local research in the EPOS and CAGIS projects over the last 10 years and on recent middleware technologies (XML and mobile agents), we mean that we have a head start in establishing a functional, innovative, cheap and flexible technology platform, that quickly can lead to validatable and useful results.

    Goals: The MOWAHS goals are threefold:
    G1) Helping to understand and to continuously assess and improve workprocesses in virtual organizations.
    G2) Providing a flexible, common work environment to execute and share real workprocesses and
    their artifacts, applicable on a variety of electronic devices (from big servers to small PDAs).
    G3) Disseminating the results to colleagues, students, companies, and the community at large.

    Approach: to iteratively:
    -- Define a flexible work environment for virtual organizations using heterogeneous devices, with
    support for processes and their artifacts and transactions.
    -- Implement a testbed for process support for virtual organizations, using XML-based and mobile agents.
    -- Use real scenarios to evaluate the environment, e.g., for software development and remote education. 25% of the work will be spent on formulating requirements and success criteria, and to perform empirical studies. In all this, own MSc students will be actively used for implementation and evaluation.

    Results – mainly as PhD theses, papers, reports, software, and Web material – and covering the following:
    R1) A formalism to define and execute federated and heterogeneous processes, establish and control
    workspaces and cooperating transactions, based on XML.
    R2) A simple set of tools to support the above, based on agent technology.
    R3) A set of scenarios with defined work models, using the above formalisms.
    R4) A body of experiences from empirical studies of such technologies, as articles, reports etc.
    R5) General presentation material and courses/seminars.

    Partners: the software engineering and database research groups at IDI, NTNU. These have together 8 teachers, 12 PhD students and 25 MSc students. The groups will exploit and enhance their competence in process support, workspace management, agent technology and cooperative transactions -- e.g., from the national EPOS and CAGIS projects, and from the ESPRIT projects PROMOTER and PROMOTER2.

    Budget and management: MOWAHS is planned for 4 years, with 1.5 PhD students and 1 postdoc per year financed by NFR -- totally 5000 KNOK (977 KNOK in 2001). Another PhD student is expected to be financed by NTNU. In addition comes involvement of teachers, guest researchers and the surrounding university environment. Total capitalized NTNU effort is estimated to 3251 KNOK (500 KNOK in year 2001). Two external reviews are envisaged, respectively after 2 and 3.5 years.

    Keywords: Virtual organizations, process models, mobile agents, heterogeneous systems, federated and distributed systems, distributed workspaces, cooperative transactions, XML.

  3. Goals
  4. The MOWAHS goals are:

    G1) Helping us to better understand and to continuously assess and improve real workprocesses in virtual organizations.

    This is important, since the new network technologies enable and create radically different work modes. We have to assess (i.e. validate) how novel and old workprocesses can benefit from the proposed technologies (from concepts to tools). This gives feedback both to the workprocesses and to the technologies.

     

    G2) Providing a flexible, and (logically) common work environment to execute and share real workprocesses and their artifacts, applicable on a variety of electronic devices (from big servers to small PDAs).

    This is mainly the technological sub-goal to achieve the former, overall goal.

     

    G3) Dissemination and exchange of the knowledge gained, by PhD theses, articles, reports, courses, seminars etc. – partly by active Web utilization.

    This goal will also contribute to an implicit goal: to consolidate and rejuvenate the IDI competencies

    in these areas, and for IDI to gain national and international recognition as a competence centre in the

    same areas.

    Another implicit goal is give our students updated education on these very relevant subjects.

     

    Research activities will have first priority, but practical trials for validation against local end-users (mostly own students) will have larger emphasis that in the previous EPOS and CAGIS projects.

    The next section will describe the planned results, and link them to the above goals.

  5. Results
  6. The following results are planned to achieve the stated goals:

    R1) A combined formalism to define and execute distributed and heterogeneous processes and their distributed and mobile workspaces, all based on XML.

    This has two parts:
    1. A process model formalism to express simple and flexible work processes (e.g., with activities, roles, agents, and tools),
    2. A transaction model formalism to express associated and customized workspaces (e.g., with data, behaviour, and consistency constraints), seen as cooperating transactions.

    These formalisms and their underlying concepts contribute to goal G2 on technology improvement.

    R2) A simple and ''low-key'' set of tools (model editors and interpreters) and their joint tool/platform architecture.

    This will be based on recent agent technology (e.g., aglets) and middleware (messaging, CORBA, RMI/JMS, JavaSpaces etc.), cf. the existing DIAS architecture for CAGIS [WLC99] in Section 6.5.

    These tools and their architecture also contribute to goal G2 on technology improvement.

    R3) A set of work scenarios and corresponding work models, i.e. process and transaction models, using the above formalisms.

    This will mostly consist of work models of varying sophistication. It will cover scenarios from two areas: software engineering and remote education. We envisage that these scenarios will evolve during the project, as a result from planned experimentation and due to local extension and customization.

    The scenarios and more detailed work models contribute to goal G1 on understanding and improving workprocesses.

    R4) A body of experiences from empirical studies of applying such technologies on the above scenarios. These experiences will be used for validation and feedback to both the scenarios (R3) and the technologies (R1-R2).

    For the experiments we will use local students, partly working in project groups. Well-known techniques for empirical studies will be used, but such studies represent anyhow a challenge.
    The resulting experiences will be made available as reports, articles etc.

    This also contributes to goal G1 on workprocess improvement.

    R5) External publications, presentation material, and new courses/seminars.

    This material will have the form of reports, articles, course notes, presentation foils, exercises, formal scenario descriptions (R3), systematic experiences (R4) etc.

    A new, Norwegian semi-annual workshop on virtual organizations is planned, e.g. in cooperation with other IKT-2010 projects. All this contributes to goal G3 on dissemination.

     

    The above results will be delivered as parts of PhD and MSc theses, published papers, reports, software (prototype tools and models), and Web material.

    It is hard to quantify the economic value of these results on Norwegian IT industry and IT users, since MOWAHS is meant to be a PhD-type, research project. The potential relevance and usability of these results are, however, undisputed, and results R3-R4 are relevant for most organizations exploring the new work modes.

    Further, there is a huge, indirect and long-term benefit by giving more relevant education in and exposure to novel workprocess technologies to university students.

    Lastly, many of the above results may be applicable and relevant to other domains, such as groupware, business reengineering, workflow management, and mobile and distributed databases.

  7. Resources
  8. The effort will roughly be divided equally between the two groups at NTNU. The budget figures in the below table are in PY (person-years) and KNOK (1000 kr):

    Category

    2001

    2002

    2003

    2004

    Sum PY

    Sum KNOK

    2 PhD fellows, phased

    1

    2

    2

    1

    6

    2482

    2 Post-docs, phased

    1

    2

    1

     -

    4

    2118

    SUM PY, NFR-part

    2

    4

    3

    1

    10

    -

    Wages, NFR-part

    907

    1906

    1370

    417

    -

    4600

    Seminars & courses

     

    25

     

    25

    -

    50

    Guests, travel

     

    25

     

    25

    -

    50

    Participants, travel

    20

    80

    80

    20

    -

    200

    Equipment

    50

    50

       

    -

    100

    SUM KNOK, NFR-part

    977

    2086

    1450

    487

    -

    5000

    1 PhD fellow

    -

    1

    1

    1

    3

    1251

    PhD advisors (2*0.2)

    0.4

    0.4

    0.4

    0.4

    1.6

    1600

    Guest res., part-time

    0.1

    0.1

    0.1

    0.1

    0.4

    400

    SUM PY, univ.-part

    0.5

    1.5

    1.5

    1.5

    5

    -

    SUM KNOK, univ.-part

    500

    917

    917

    917

     

    3251

     

    The applied amount from NFR is 5000 KNOK (977 KNOK in year 2001), plus 3251 KNOK (500 KNOK in year 2001) covered by the university partners. Standard NFR rates (2001) have been applied on annual wages for PhD students (397 KNOK) and post-docs (510 KNOK) – with a 5% estimated inflation for 2002-2004. Otherwise, an assumed rate of 1000 KNOK per year has been applied for university teachers.

    As shown, the two IDI groups each expects to have one PhD student and one post-doc in turns, all covered by NFR. One PhD student (on cooperative transactions?) will start in 2000, the other PhD student (on mobile processes?) the following year. Note, that the PhD students will have a 4th year, financed by the university, to serve as teaching assistants.

    The post-docs will be overlapped in year two of the project, in order to achieve early technology consolidation in the project, and due to local availability of possible PhD-candidates from CAGIS (first Alf Inge Wang?, then Heri Ramampiaro?). Wang is also a candidate for a de-facto project manager.

    Guest researchers (two per year and 3-5 weeks per visit) are also included. In addition, one internally financed PhD student is assumed, plus shares of the time of advisors and guest researchers.

    The effect of mobilizing own MSc students is not counted, but is expected to be considerable (''light-house effect'' of a factor 2-3).

  9. Background and Previous Work
    1. Motivation
    2. The dependency of our society on modern information technology is wellknown -- see the European Union's Fifth Framework Program (www.forskningsradet.no/eu, www.cordis.lu/ist) and the PITAC initiative in the USA (www.hpcc.gov). For instance, in April 1998 in the USA the number of email-messages exceeded the number of phone calls and postal letters. The Internet now has 350 million users. And it is expected to be 3 billion mobile phones world-wide in 2004, and 1/10 of these will have Internet access and be attached to powerful computers (source: IDC). UMTS will give bandwidths of 1Mbit per second between mobile devices.

       

      Figure 1: Virtual organizations, with mobile and distributed actors.

      More and more companies are therefore working as virtual organizations, where people are distributed over several locations and time zones. Distributed, mobile and partly asynchronous technology enables sharing of documents and work plans. However, the infrastructure and tools for carrying out projects in virtual organizations are immature. Both the EU and USA therefore emphasize the need for better and more reliable computer support to better exploit the existing IT infrastructure and available tools.

      In such environments, we have to deal with heterogeneity of tools, equipments and work models, as well as mobility. Smaller handheld devices (laptops, PDAs, mobile phones etc.) make it easier to do work when moving around, but require regular synchronization against stationary servers and PCs.

      A research challenge is to provide an efficient and flexible environment for helping people in virtual organizations to work where they are in space and time. For instance, how to support and manage mobile and distributed workprocesses, with executable plans and needed work artifacts, independent of the equipment (device) used, its location and the actual time.

      Figure 1 displays the general characteristics of a virtual organization with distributed and mobile actors. Figure 2 in Section 6.2 shows a more detailed picture.

    3. State of the art
    4. Hint: the knowledgeable reader needs only to read the summaries at the end of each subsection.

      In the end of each subsection, we have added a paragraph on CAGIS and some research trends.

      1. Middleware: Web technologies, Distributed objects, and Agents.

For a general introduction to middleware, see Bernstein [Ber96] and the book by Emmerich [Emm00a].

The World-Wide-Web (WWW) has provided an easy, although simple way to make information and associated services widely available. Connected to the Web/Internet, universal Web clients will run a local Web browser that talks to a Web server, that again may talk to a database server over a CGI (Common Gateway Interface) protocol. There are recently several, user-oriented design tools for creating and maintaining Web pages and corresponding Web sites. The Web relies on the Hyper-Text Markup Language (HTML) for describing stored and shown documents, but HTML lacks the capability of specialization. That is, HTML describes how the data on a Web page is presented, but does not "understand'' what the data represents. The eXtended Markup Language (XML)[Hol98,XML99] is more flexible, because we can define our own markup elements. This enables us to tailor a document (often a textual model in some formal language) to our own needs, storing and structuring the data (i.e. document symbols) as we like. A plethora of XML parsers and other support tools have also become available for free. Lastly, there is the WebDav [WW98] initiative for collaborative versioning and editing of Web documents, although the versioning model is very simple.

Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) is a result of continuous work to define an industry-wide specification for developing applications that operate over wireless communication networks. Wireless Markup Language (WML) is a markup language based on XML and is intended to specify content and user interfaces for narrow-band devices, including cellular phones and pagers. WML [WAP99] is designed to cope with the constraints of small, narrow-band devices: small display and limited input facilities, narrow-band network connection, and limited memory and computational resources. WML includes four major functional areas:

The Object Request Broker (ORB) concept and the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) [OMG97,Bak97] is a central part of Object Management Architecture (OMA) defined by the Object Management Group (OMG). CORBA defines a mechanism that allows software components to communicate with each other and the system itself. The location of components living on a CORBA bus (software component bus) is totally transparent to the clients, and the clients can invoke a component's methods, both statically and dynamically bound. Static invokation means that the client know the method name and its parameters. For dynamic invokation, the client will ask the server for information about available methods. All applications/objects communicate through the CORBA bus, and their interfaces are specified in the Interface Definition Language (IDL). The CORBA IDL is mappable to programming languages like Java, C, C++, Perl, COBOL etc. The CORBA services are collections of system-level services packaged with IDL-specified interfaces, that complement the functionality of the ORB. OMG has published standards (some rather general) for several services, such as naming, events, lifecycle, persistence, transactions, concurrency control, relationships, externalization, licensing, querying, properties, security, time, collections, and trading. The CORBA facilities and domain interfaces provide component frameworks that specify rules of engagement, common data formats, and architecture boundaries.

Microsoft Distributed Component Architecture (MDCA) [CRW98] is an architecture that is Microsoft's answer to the challenges that component software presents the computer industry today. Component Object Model (COM), Distributed COM (DCOM) [CRW96] and its ActiveX language, and the next generation COM (COM+) denotes a set of related component object models, that are incorporated into Microsoft's family of Windows operating systems. The "wrapped'' components may exist as binary code, not only as source code as is the case with CORBA. The term ActiveX do not refer to a well-defined technology, but can be characterized as a brand name. Today, ActiveX are most commonly used to denote ActiveX Controls, which are components that follow certain standards in how they interact with their clients. COM is not a technology for implementing components, but is used to define components and their interfaces. In addition, COM defines how components and clients interact by providing means for clients to call methods in components through a well-defined interface. COM provides transparent access to components on a single host. DCOM extends COM and makes it possible for components to communicate across a network. COM+ makes it easier for developers to create and use software components in any programming language and by using any tool. COM+ also introduces several new services to components, such as publishing and subscribing, in-memory database with transaction support, queued components, and dynamic load balancing.

Java Remote Method Invocation (Java RMI) [Mic99a] is an interprocess protocol for Java, allowing Java Objects living in different Java Virtual Machines to invoke transparently each other's methods. Since these Virtual Machines can be running on different computers anywhere on the network, RMI enables object-oriented distributed computing.

JINI technology [Edw99,Mic00] is designed to enable users to simply connect any number of digital devices to the network, creating a "plug-and-play'' community. With the use of JINI technology, the network itself can be very dynamic; devices and services can be added and removed regularly. JINI provides mechanisms to enable smooth adding, removal, and finding devices and services on the network. JINI is built on top of Java, object serialization and RMI, which (as mentioned) enables objects to move around the network between virtual machines.

JavaSpaces [Mic99b,FHA99] from Sun is based on JINI, and is a framework for dynamic communication, coordination, and sharing of objects between network resources like clients and servers. In a distributed application, JavaSpaces technology acts as a virtual space between providers and requesters of network resources or objects. The virtual space serves as a shared, network-accessible repository for objects. This virtual space allows participants in a distributed environment to exchange tasks, requests and information in the form of objects located in different JavaSpaces. The communication is handled by matching objects in a Space with template objects; thus there is no need to know the address of a specified host. This means that JavaSpaces technology provides a novel programming model, that views an application as a collection of processes cooperating via the flow of objects into and out of one or more JavaSpaces. It differs from the traditional view where messages are passed between processes to invoke methods on remote objects.

An attempt to apply a generalized, event-based messaging mechanism to facilitate communication in distributed systems is described in [CNF98]. Events are "reactive", asynchronous and 1:1, while remote procedure calls (RPCs) are "active'', synchronous and 1:N. One of the first event-based systems was the Field architecture to connect "enveloped tools'' in a non-obtrusive way, done by Steve Reiss at Brown University [Rei90]. There is a growing acknowledgement that messaging systems are more flexible and scalable that RPC-based systems, i.e. that client/server systems imply a too strict architecture. See e.g. [CG98] and also the PIE project in 5.2.3.

Mobile agents have become a very popular research topic lately, but is also a much mis- or overused term. Many technologies facilitate moving objects between hosts. The Aglets framework [LO98, Lan97, OKO98, LA97] was developed by IBM's Research Laboratory in Japan, but is not being supported anymore. In essence, aglets provide support for running Java programs (code and state) to move around in a network from one host to another. That is, an aglet executing on a host can suddenly halt execution, dispatch (migrate) to another remote host, and start executing again. There are often misunderstandings between the terms (active) aglets and (passive) applets. Unlike applets, an aglet also carries its execution state when it migrates. An applet is only passive code, that can move across the network from a server to a client. At a (new) client, the applet is initialized in the context of a run-time process where an interpreter can execute its code. An aglet can, because it is carrying its state wherever it goes, travel in sequence to many destinations on a network.

Voyager [Gla99] by ObjectSpace is a product family consisting of an ORB with services, and an application server where the ORB is supporting mobile agents. Odyssey [Whi96] developed by General Magic enables developers to create and debug their own mobile agent applications implemented in Java, and offers support for arranging meetings on particular hosts, and for publication of objects. Jumping Beans [Ad 99] builds on the Java platform and provides a framework for Java programs to "jump'' from computer to computer. The Jumping Beans architecture is based on a client-server architecture, where programs moving from one host to another must do this through a central management server. The central management server has a very strict security system. This implies that the Jumping Bean framework is best suited for small distributed networks, rather than WANs like the Internet (because of firewalls). Grasshopper [IKV00] is an agent development platform launched by IKV++ in 1998. It enables users to create agent applications enhancing electronic commerce applications, dynamic information retrieval, advanced telecommunication services, and mobile computing. Grasshopper is completely implemented in Java, giving the benefit of highly distributed integration. Bonding and Encapsulation Enhancement Agent (Bee-gent) [Cor00] is an agent development framework developed by Toshiba Corporation. It is entirely based on the mobile agent concept. All applications become agents, and all messages are carried by agents; thus it is possible to build a distributed system using existing applications .

Summaries of recent work on middleware, XML and agents stand in Eliassen et al. [E+99], the two ICSE'2000 roadmap papers on Software Engineering and Middleware [Emm00b] and on Software Engineering for Mobility [RPM00], and the ICSE’2000 Workshop on Agent-Oriented Softare engineering [CW00].

In CAGIS, architectural work has centered on a Distributed Intelligent Agent System (DIAS) [WLC99]. DIAS is a multi-agent architecture supporting mobile agents communicating using KWML, where agents and Agent Meeting Places (AMPs) are the main components. All inter-agent communication is executed in AMPs, where system agents offer services to other agents. DIAS define three main types of agents, taken from the CAGIS work on agoras [MDP98] to denote special AMPs:
-- System agents responsible for administration and support in AMPs (registration, un-registration);
-- Participant agents to support for cooperative interaction (coordination, collaboration, negotiation); and
-- User agents (or work agents) created and used by a user, typically a process engine or a search agent. The first versions of DIAS where implemented in Aglets and Java [PHBN99,HN00], but we are working on migrating DIAS to Java and JavaSpaces [SW00].

In CAGIS there is also a novel GlueServer [Wan99,Wan00], being a new middleware for connecting static (pre-planned) workflow with software agents to achieve more dynamic (on-the-fly) cooperation and negotiation [Bjø00]. The GlueServer consists of a GlueEngine, a GlueModel, an Agent Interface and a Workflow Interface. A GlueModel, written in XML, specifies how simple workflow processes involves interactive agents for handling cooperative and dynamic aspects of the process. A workflow tool will typically notify the GlueServer the workflow process state. The GlueServer will check this state against the GlueModel, and possibly invoke agents (e.g. negotiation agents) based on what is defined in the model. The result (e.g. from the negotiation) will be brought back to the GlueServer, and a reaction (also defined in the GlueModel) will be sent back to the workflow tool. Typical reactions can be to restart a workflow sub-process, change a workflow subprocess, halt a workflow subprocess etc. The GlueServer is implemented in Java, XML parser from Sun Microsystems, and OrbixWEB's CORBA implementation.

Research trends for Web Technologies, Distributed objects, and Agents:

      1. Process Modeling Languages and Process-centered Software Engineering Environments (PMLs/PSEEs)

Within the Software Process community, the research area on how to support distributed, heterogeneous and partly mobile software processes has recently been popular topic. In [Tia98], Tiako outlines how to model a federation of Process Sensitive Engineering Environments (PSEEs). In such a federation, large development projects can be realized by dividing the whole process in to smaller pieces assigned to distributed teams. The teams work on their own processes using their own PSEEs. Tiako describes a federation process support architecture that aims to support not only the enactment of processes, but also their definition by composition, decomposition and/or federation.

In [BSK95], Ben-Shaul et al. propose the Oz approach to provide a federated PSEE by composing different instances of local PSEEs. Each instance is devoted to support the development process executed by a single organization. The different PSEEs run autonomously according to their own processes. Interaction of several PSEEs is accomplished through a common activity called summit, where one site acts as a coordinator and receives all needed data from other sites. The result is sent back from the coordinator to all involved sites, so called master-slave federation.

In [BCN+96], Basile et al. take Oz as a starting point to provide federated PSEEs, and allows several inter-organization policies to be implemented and combined. In the paper, various mechanisms and policies for federated PSEEs are discussed, and interaction in such a federation can be characterized by:
-- Geographical distribution, where the organization can be centralized or distributed;
-- Homogeneous vs. heterogeneous processes, where processes can be the same or differ locally;
-- Homogeneous vs. heterogeneous technologies where same/different technologies can be used locally;
-- Single company vs. multiple companies; and
-- Single nation vs. multiple nations dealing with problems with different languages and cultures.
In such a federation, levels of abstractions are used to differ between areas of concern. The Basile et al. paper defines four abstraction levels in a federation:
1) Infrastructure -- typically TCP/IP, DCE, and CORBA;
2) Basic operations built on top of the PML/PSEE as specific process fragments;
3) Inter-organization policies -- directly implemented as constructs provided by PML; and
4) Inter-organization process -- support for definition and enactment of inter-organization processes.

The ESPRIT PIE project (project no. 34840 on Process Instance Evolution in 1998-2000 [CDE+00]) attempts to federate several PSEEs by sophisticated and partly reflexive messaging facilities (middleware). PIE distinguishes between federations of type master-slave (either pre-planned or not) and peer-to-peer (no master, so pre-planned). PIE will partly use the APEL (Abstract Process Engine Language) [DEA98] to describe and execute federated processes.

The workflow community has also been focusing on building systems that support distributed processes. In [YL99], Yoo and Lee describe a mobile agent platform for workflow systems called X-MAS (proXy acting Mobile Agent Systems). A workflow system using the X-MAS mobile agent platform has a centralized coordinator. The workflow model (process model) is defined centrally in a workflow definition tool. The workflow management engine realizes workflow instances as mobile agents by asking the mobile agent platform to create them. If there are any time constraints on agents, this information is stored in an agent manager in the agent execution engine. The mobile agents (workflow instances) may move from host to host, and interact with other entities, such as users, databases, and applications.

Endeavors is an open, distributed, extensible process execution environment developed at University of California Irvine, and has been licensed by a start-up company called Endeavors Technology Incorporated. Endeavors is designed to improve coordination and managerial control of development teams by allowing flexible definition, modeling, and execution of typical workflow applications. XML is used extensively for implementation. There are five main characteristics of Endeavors: 1) Distribution -- Support for transparently distributed people, artifacts, process objects, and execution behaviour (handlers) using Web protocols. 2) Integration -- Allows bi-directional communication between its internal objects and external tools, objects, and services through its open interfaces across all levels of the architecture. Multiple programming languages are also supported through APIs. 3) Incremental Adoption -- Components of the system (user interfaces, interpreters, and editing tools), may be down-loaded as needed, and no explicit system installation is required to view and execute a workflow-style process. 4) Customization and Reuse -- Implemented as a layered virtual machines architecture, and allows object-oriented extensions of the architecture, interfaces, and data formats at each layer. 5) Dynamic Change -- Allows dynamic changing of object fields and methods, the ability to dynamically change object behaviour at run-time, and late binding of the resources needed to execute a workflow process. Process interpreters are dynamically created as needed.

ProcessWeb [Yeo96] is a simple Web interface to the ProcessWise Integrator (PWI) [PMC96] tool produced by ICL. The work was done in cooperation with the Information Process Group at the University of Manchester. PWI creates an environment to enable the activities of people in an enterprise to be coordinated, and integrated with the organization's computing facilities. A process management system built using the PWI has a client/server structure, and consists of four main components: User Interface, Process Control Manager, Process description in the PWI "PML", and an Application Interface. The most important component of PWI is the Process Control Manager (process engine), which acts as the central server. Its main function is to interpret the PML description of the process. To ensure that processes may continue indefinitely, the Process Control Manager has been implemented using a persistent store technology. However, support for artifacts and workspaces/transactions are missing.

The Workflow Management Coalition has worked out a specification for interoperability workflow binding in XML [WfM00], relying on an earlier, high-level process formalism (Process Interchange Format, PIF) and a standard, albeit general tool architecture. The intention of this XML specification is to allow workflow systems -- supporting simple, chained and nested workflows -- to interoperate both synchronously and synchronously. In practice, this means that one workflow system can exchange data and operations with another workflow system, independent of their local implementation platforms. The XML specification describes how information in a workflow message, exchanged between workflow systems, should be written. Two types of messages can be used: request and response. A request message is used to initiate an operation in a remote resource, and/or to provide input to that resource. A response message is used to send the result of an operation back to its requesting resource, thus providing output. The XML specification further defines how to specify process context and data, process status, error handling, and actual operation. Four operations are defined (can be of type request and response):
1) CreateProcessInstance is used to instantiate a known process definition,
2) GetProcessInstanceData is used to retrieve the values of properties defined for the given process
instance resource,
3) ChangeProcessInstanceState is used to modify the process instance state, and
4) ProcessInstanceStateChanged is used to notify that a state change event has occurred.

Process support by XML-based agents seems very popular recently, see work by Dossick and Kaiser on CHIME [DK99] and the ICSE’2000 roadmap paper on Agent-Oriented Software Engineering by Bompani et al. [BCV00].

Two summary articles on process and workflow technology are written by, respectively, Bolcer and Taylor [BT98], and by Cugola and Ghezzi [CG98] -- both with large reference lists. See also the ICSE'2000 roadmap paper on Software Process by Fuggetta [Fug00].

In CAGIS, we have developed the CAGIS simple process modelling framework based on XML [Wan99,Wan00] and the above-mentioned GlueServer. XML-based process model fragments are interpreted by CGI-based process server. A total process model can consist of several semi-independent process modell fragments, distributed in various workspaces with the ability to move around. Our XML-based process modelling language is only used to specify simple, structured processes. Theses processes can however be in a distributed and mobile environment, since these characteristics are supported in CAGIS simple process modelling framework. For more dynamic and cooperative processes, software agents are used., although a local process engine itself constitutes a simple work agent. The previously mentioned CAGIS GlueServer provide the necessary framework for interaction between process server and the agent system (DIAS) – see 5.2.1.

Research trends for PMLs/PSEEs:

      1. Process support for cooperative work

Cooperative work involves three aspects:

 

Cooperative systems and related support are also categorized according to the time / location (spatial / temporal) matrix [Gru94]: that is, synchronous / asynchronous and non-distributed / distributed. In addition comes personal, organizational and cultural variety.

Most of the work in the software process and workflow community (see 5.2.2) has been focusing on how to make people work together in an organized and model-based way (partly pre-planned). For high-level processes with little detail, it is possible to make people work in this manner. However, the development of software -- or creative work in general -- involves people that cooperate closely, improvise and negotiate to solve problems and do the actual work. These kind of processes are very hard to support by traditional software process support tools, because the focus will be more at the collaborative and communicative aspects, rather than pure work coordination [WLCM98].

Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) or Groupware is a multi-disciplinary research area focusing on effective methods of sharing information and coordinating activities, see [EGR91]. Much CSCW work has been characterized as being synchronous and distributed. We may add an extra dimension to the CSCW typologies, where different kinds of cooperative work are characterized by the increasing complexity of the process support they need [CC98]:

1. Ad-hoc cooperative work such as brainstorming, cooperative learning, informal meetings, design work etc. The related process support is often implemented by interactive blackboards and awareness triggers, such as in [DT93] and Ariadne [SD97]. Further, there is little formal product modelling to explain why certain people are "related'', and therefore need to cooperate. A simple, Web-based workspace and document server is BSCW from GmD [B+97].

2. Predefined/strict workflow, in traditional Office Automation style is often represented by simple document/process flow. Examples of such systems can be Lotus Notes [Orl92], Active Mail [GSSS92] and MAFIA [LvKRH90].

3. Coordinated workflow, such as traditional, centralized software maintenance work consisting of check-out, data processing, check-in, and merge steps. There exist several systems supporting coordinated workflow (mostly as prototypes), e.g., EPOS [C+94], MARVEL and partly Oz [BSK95], and ADELE and its APEL language [DEA98].

4. Cooperative workflow, such as decentralized software development and maintenance work conducted in a distributed organization or across organizations. Here (partially) shared workspaces, cooperation planning -- in addition to evolution and federation -- are the main extra factors from the process point of view. A system supporting distributed organizations and processes is Oz [BSK95].

Lastly, it must be said that CSCW has had a much laudable tradition for involving social scientists -- such as psychologists, social anthropologists, and organizational theorists -- in carrying out realistic (or in-vivo) studies.

Some recent papers on how to use the Internet for carrying out cooperative software engineering were presented at the 3rd Workshop on Software Engineering over the Internet [M+00], held at ICSE’2000. See also the ICSE’2000 roadmap paper on Software Engineering and the Internet [BCV00].

Related work in CAGIS has centered around special agent meeting places, also called agoras in [MDP98], where standard or specialized agents can meet to help solve or negotiate about a given task. Such on-the-fly-created meeting places are different than conventional, controlled workspaces with formally checked-out artifacts. The process support in CAGIS (including the GlueServer, the XML-based process tools, and the multi-agent system) can also be viewed as framework for cooperative workflow, since the focus is on support for distributed processes with cooperative aspects. Our approach combines CSCW-like coopeative agents with traditional process support.

Research trends for cooperative work:

      1. Novel transaction models

Traditional DBMSes have a strict consistency (or integrity) concept, related to the data model and requiring explicit, serializable ACID transactions[Gra81], being short, programmable and server executable. This means that analysis of application programs can be used to increase concurrency [FO89]. E.g., we may delay locking of certain objects, have special lock types, unlock before final commit etc. In the "Extended Transaction model'' by [Jab93] it is tried to use activity scripts and PRE/POST-conditions expressed in temporal logic to achieve some lock planning.

For distributed or medium-length transactions, there may be the well-known, two-phase lock-unlock-commit protocol to establish checked-out, local workspaces. However, software engineering involves large data sets at the client sites and long update times. Since the scope and sequence of updates are hard to predict and may involve overlapping/versioned subsystems, traditional locking procedures may cause intolerable delays. Thus, software engineering needs -- in addition to ACID transactions -- also non-serializable transactions, often called design transactions [KKB85], being long and interactive. Related fields, such as concurrent engineering in CAD/CAM and VLSI, have recognized similar needs.

Then what to do? A simple trick, when mutual two-phase locking is not practical or applicable, is to check out copies (i.e. temporary versions) of shared data in a local workspace at project start, perform the updates locally, then check-in and perform final merging / reconciliation / integration. User-defined consistency constraints are often applied a-posteriori, and should therefore be explicitly expressed.

An analogy is simple re-synchronization (updating) of files, when mobile PCs/PDAs are reconnected to a central server. We can also mention work at University of Colorado at Boulder on the Software Dock [HHW99], where a user can specify a (partial) software configuration, and have it shipped (perhaps incrementally upon changes), and installed locally.

Another analogy is software configuration management (SCM) [CW97] which implies establishment and management of local and unversioned workspaces, being checked out from a (logically) central and versioned repository. Some CM systems, such as ClearCase [Leb94] and ADELE [Est99], allow distributed and cooperative work, based on product knowledge of checked-out workspaces, but do not yet support mobile work. Digression: When all transactions in an unversioned DBMS commit, there is one canonical and consistent version of the database. In contrast, a versioned database maintains and controls permanently and mutually separate (sub)databases!

Back to transaction work: since Moss proposed a nested transaction model [Mos82,Mos85] -- though still ACID, many novel database transaction models have been proposed. However, there are few implementations and even fewer validations of these models, although work on more advanced transaction models seems rather popular [BK91,Elm92,Kho93,BJP94,Kim95,Moh94,JK97,RN99].

Most of these transaction models propose nested transactions, cf. Moss above, Gandalf [Not85], Korth et al. [KKB88] for CAD, and Marvel [KP91]. Some commercial DBMSes also provide nested transactions, e.g., DAMOKLES [DGL87], ORION [KGBW90], ObjectStore [LLOW91], ONTOS [AHS91], DEC's Object/DB [Cor92], and Adele [EC94].

Grouping of related transactions to better handle update and commit conflicts is reported in Fernandez et al. [FZ89] and Skarra [Ska89]. To better handle user-defined consistency conflicts among parent and child or among several children, special compensating child transactions can be started, as a in Sagas [GMS87] and Open-nested transactions [WS92].

The trend is towards models for cooperating transactions, by allowing pre-commit cooperation among sibling transactions (i.e. relaxed isolation property), and with special semantics to handle the aforementioned conflicts. Marvel [Kai90], Nodine et al. [NRZ92], COO [GCC+96] and EPOS [CLH95] [WLCM98] and ADELE [Est99] all fall into this category. Marvel uses split-join transactions to regulate the cooperation. COO uses a temporary, shared subdatabase (scratch-pad) for data exchange and integration work. ADELE maintains distributed workspaces, but acknowledges that it is not feasible to enforce mutually consistency or even that a local workspace has all relevant or updated data. Other models focus on adoption of transactional workflows [AAA+96,Cic98].

Because of the diverse nature of cooperation [SB92], it is agreed that a single transaction model, that can support most kinds of cooperative work situations, is not feasible or practical. For this reason, it is crucial for such models to be extensible and tailorable. ACTA [CR94] and its ASSET [BDG+94] language, TSME [GHM96] and CAGISTrans [RDP99,RN00b] are examples of existing models that address these issues. ACTA is an axiomatic meta-model used to reason and synthesize new, advanced transaction models. ASSET is a primitive language developed based on ACTA, and can be used to specify application-specific transaction models. TSME is similar to ACTA/ASSET, but it also allows configuration of transaction managers to enforce desired models.

The CAGIS transaction framework, CAGISTrans [Sel00,KK00,RN00a], is an attempt to extend the two former transaction models, ACTA/ASSET and TSME. It achieves improved dynamics and applicability by allowing customized transaction models. CAGISTrans supports definition of two kinds of specifications: a transaction characteristics specification and a transaction execution specification. The former characteristics specification defines the main properties of the actual transaction: ACID properties, relationships among the involved transactions, adopted (i.e. user-defined) correctness / consistency criteria, and applied policy (i.e., rules for what concurrency control mechanisms to be used, and how and under which conditions to use them). The latter execution specification defines how execution is to be performed at run-time, in terms of composition/sequence of transaction management operations (delegate, lock, commit etc.) and of regular access operations (read, write etc.). The execution specification must conform to the former, and has some fixed (though tailorable) initial operations, while the remaining operations can be adjusted at run-time.

Research trends for transaction models:

 

  1. Focus and Approach
    1. General position

The overall goal is to provide enhanced, effective and flexible support for mobile work -- with exchange of both artifacts and process/transaction models -- across the network and on several execution platforms, being fixed and/or mobile devices (often PCs, possibly PDAs and even mobile phones).

In all this, we have to exercise great caution in establishing realistic goals, both on the research side and on the prototyping/experimentation side. However, by maximum reuse of past technologies, both from an accelerating marketplace and from own work in CAGIS and other projects, we will try to achieve fast and "light'' prototypes. This will enable two full cycles of prototyping and validation with feedbacks within a project period of four years. An initial and revised set of requirements, with operational success criteria and coupled to realistic and testable scenarios, will "drive'' the project.

A sub-goal is to avoid "heavy'' prototypes, that come late in the project and which (therefore) may be difficult or impossible to validate. Too many advanced process or transaction technologies (concepts, methods, languages, models, tools etc.) have reached no longer than the theory stage or at best in form of an unusable prototype. On the other hand, fast and almost continuous feedback from users are needed when dealing with technologies for cooperative and mobile work. That is, we are dealing with "Internet time'', where one year is like a "dog year'' (6-7 years) in other fields -- and this also applies to university research. Cf. that the Java language is only 5 years old, and XML 2 years.

Luckily, modern network technologies seem to attract students, both to build new systems using the "hottest'' Web/XML/Java stuff, and to serve as the initial users of such cooperative and mobile systems. Many students already have portable PCs, PDAs and /or mobile phones. Therefore, we will continue to employ students whenever possible, as demonstrated in EPOS and CAGIS.

In other words, we seek to iteratively:

As mentioned, own MSc students will be actively used for implementation and evaluation, see 6.2 below.

    1. A possible usage scenario for mobile processes and cooperating workspaces

To get a better understanding of what kind of work processes and computerized support that we are taking about, we envisage the following, simplified scenario. First comes a general characterization, then a coarse process description.

General characterization:

For asynchronous communication, we use normal email and SMS-messages on mobile phones. For synchronous communication, we use a simple chat program, IRC or maybe some simple groupware tool, pluss mobile phones.

Changes to requirements, design, test and documentation artifacts are assumed out of scope here.

Programmer-1 is in charge of L1 and has both a desktop PC and a portable PC in Oslo. He has his own sub-workspace, controlled by a sub-transaction.

Programmer-2 is in charge of L2, and has a portable PC and an advanced PDA. He lives in Bergen, but is completely mobile. He has similarly his own sub-workspace and sub-transaction.

All persons are networked, but L1 and L2 may in parts be non-reachable.

Overall process description in steps:

  1. The work must first be planned:
    First, there is an initial, joint negotiation between all three parties to agree upon delivery dates, local process models and joint work mode (i.e. transaction model). The local model repository will be queried for suitable, partial models.
  2. A possible overall plan is first to configure and establish the local workspaces, involving checked-out versions of L1 and L2. Then, to do the actual work in these, under supervision of the local sub-transactions. Lastly, to bring the updated L1/L2-programs together for final testing/integration by the Manager, thus concluding the overall transaction. All this may sound very conventional, and we will see what "noise" we may experience in this process.

    The agreed-upon process/transaction model may include "awareness triggers", implemented as special agents that interpret parts of the process model.

    The local sub-transactions run in two steps: first finish the .h files, then the .cc files.

  3. Now the real work starts, with L1 and L2 programs being checked out locally (with different lock-modes) to serve Programmer-1 and Programmer-2.
  4. Then, revisions to L1.h and L2.h are posted (checked-in) in the shared workspace by the responsibles, for mutual approval. It may now be that Programmer-1 and Programmer-2 need another round of bilateral negotiation and local updates, since they mutually depend on these interfaces, before the Manager can approve the work so far.
  5. After the revised interfaces (.h files) have been approved, the real work on the bodies can start. Ideally, this should conclude by check-in of revised bodies (.cc files) to the shared workspace -- and within the agreed-upon time. But to illustrate the dynamics, we mention two not-too-unusual "exceptions'':
  6. 4a) Programmer-1 expresses (as a L2 client) a need for a new change in the L2 interface. So again, a (simple) negotiation is needed, followed by a reposting of the revised and agreed-upon L2 interface in the shared workspace.

    4b) Programmer-2 (the mobile one) falls behind schedule, and/or is impossible to reach. Thus, the Manager has to take over, and perform some crude fixes in the L2 body to, just perform an initial intergration. Later, Programmer-2 "reappears", and must undo/merge the fixes, and post the revised but delayed L2 body in the shared workspace.

    In 4a and 4b we might conceive special ("intelligent") agents, e.g. to perform searches or to reason about the next process steps.

  7. Overall synthesis and testing, done by the Manager.
    This may again involve further, delegated follow-ups, but we will not go into details here.
  8. Finalization, also done by the Manager.

So, even in this simple example we have many cases of evolving process/cooperation models, some improvisation, and problems in dealing with mobility and distribution (e.g. due to lack of connectivity). Figure 2 illustrates the proposed MOWAHS architecture and models for this scenario:

Figure 2: Proposed MOWAHS architecture for the scenario.

    1. The more detailed, initial MOWAHS requirements
    2. These requirements are in short:

      RQ1: Let the project be driven by real user requirements and clear evaluation criteria.
      This means to define scenarios, and formal models of these, to better understand and improve old and novel work processes,

      RQ2: Spend 25% of the time in requirements specification and actual experimentation, in order to achieve proper validation.

      RQ3: Give support for flexible and mobile work across different computer platforms and locations, but have one common formalism/tool support.

      That is, federation across platforms, but not over different PMLs/PSEEs or over semantically different modeling formalisms for e.g. process/data modelling.

      RQ4: Emphasize fast and light solutions: XML, Java, agents etc.
      For instance, all models should be stored as texts in files.
      The software artifacts are also assumed to be files. Simple versioning applies to all such files.
      Actively pursue reuse of models at all levels.

      RQ5: Exploit existing and upcoming network/middleware technologies, cf. RQ3-RQ4.

      RQ6: Exploit our existing CAGIS platform for process and transaction support.

      RQ7: Incorporate the MOWAHS technologies in own education and student project work.

      RQ8: Disseminate actively, including a new semi-annual, national workshop on virtual organizations.

      All these points have been set up to minimize risks, and maximize the chances of validation of a flexible and effective support for mobile, cooperative work across heterogeneous computer platforms.

    3. Technology platform, the start position

Our initial technology and experimental base is as follows:

Most of the above will be commented and elaborated in the workpackages WP2-WP3 (next Section 7).

 

  1. Workplan
    1. General set-up
    2. The project consists of two research groups, having a shared, co-located core team of PhD-students and post-docs. Thus three PhD students (one internally financed), one post-doc, two advisors, ca. 10 MSc students and some part-time guest researchers will have their daily work in this team.

      We foresee two one-month visits per year by international researchers. Likewise, the PhD students are expected to spend 6-8 months abroad during their study.

      There will be joint, project meetings every two weeks, and internal/external seminars every half year, coordinated with e.g. other IKT-2010 projects (see T4.2 on a proposed, national workshop on virtual organizations).

      The research will be made available in reports, internationally published articles, seminar presentations, and in revised university courses (for NAWUS educational network and EEU courses). A local Web-node will be present the activities and results of the project.

    3. General phasing and work structure
    4. The workplan consist of four phases, grouped in two major parts:

      1. year: Upstart: updated rqmts after 3 months, then initial MOWAHS system (concepts, models, tool kit).

      2. year: Experimentation and adjusting the system in an iterative way. End of part 1.

      3. year: Make second and consolidated MOWAHS system, with further experiments.

      4. year: Consolidation of results, and wrap-up of PhD theses. End of part 2.

      As mentioned, we will plan for external reviews after 2 and 3.5 years.

       

       

      2001

      2002

      2003

      2004

      Main activities

      1

      2

      3

      4

      1

      2

      3

      4

      1

      2

      3

      4

      1

      2

      3

      4

      Establish 1st Mowahs system

      X

      -

      -

      X

                             

      Iterative experimentation and adjustment

             

      X

      -

      -

      X

                     

      1st External review

                   

      X

                     

      Establish, experiment and adjust 2nd Mowahs system

                     

      X

      -

      -

      X

             

      Result consolidation & PhD-theses wrap-up

                             

      X

      -

      -

      X

      2nd External review

                               

      X

         

      Knowledge dissemination

         

      X

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      -

      X

      Workshops on virtual organizations

             

      X

       

      X

       

      X

       

      X

       

      X

       

      X

       

       

      The deliverables below will follow this general phasing.

      The project is proposed to have four workpackages (WP1-WP4), each grouped in tasks (Tx.n):

      WP1: Project Management – coordination and reporting.

      WP2: Technological Support -- requirements/scenarios, concepts/formalisms/tools, architecture.

      WP3: Empirical Studies -- for software engineering and remote education.

      WP4: Dissemination and Contact – conf.s, courses, virtual organization workshop, Web site.

    5. WP1. Project Management

WP1 covers project coordination and reporting:

Internal deliverables: Internal reports, articles, presentations.

Internal/external deliverables: Status reports, news sheets -- mainly on the Web (T4.4).

    1. WP2. Technological Support

WP2 covers requirements/scenarios, concepts/formalisms/tools for process and transactions, and overall architecture:

 

It is crucial to have a relevant set of "end-user'' requirements and corresponding evaluation criteria to guide and drive the project technologically (WP2) and to perform validations against (WP3). We will therefore have an initial solidification of requirements in the first three months, and a revised version after the first round of evaluations (after year 2). This work will serve to focus the project, and to get new PhD students quickly updated on relevant issues. GQM-techniques will be used to define criteria/metrics.

As mentioned, we will have one scenario on software engineering and one on remote education, both in a distributed and mobile setting. There seems to be a lack of "standard'' scenarios in this area, so this work could also develop into a joint effort with other research teams, and produce a deliverable in its own right.

Relevant research challenges are:
-- What are the proper evaluation criteria for such scenarios; both for the processes and the support?
-- How to design minimal and scalable scenarios to cover relevant parts of cooperative and mobile work?
-- Can we beforehand guess what kind of support is most suited or effective for certain workprocesses?
-- What kinds of mobile devices are most suited for what parts of the workprocesses?

Internal deliverables: Work notes on scenarios, required support, and evaluation criteria.
External deliverables: technical reports and MSc theses on scenarios, requirements and eval.criteria.

 

Process and workflow systems today often have the assumption that user-clients should be connected to a server when using the system, and that only one type of client computer is used. However, people using these systems are getting more mobile, and are using desktop PCs, laptop PCs, palmtop PDAs, and mobile phones to communicate. Existing process and workflow systems do not cope with the heterogeneity of equipment and mobility of users. We want to give effective and flexible workflow support for users through a common, light-weight, XML-based workflow framework. This will cope with users working on different places and moving around, users working on-line and off-line, as well as users accessing the workflow system using different equipment. But, as mentioned in RQ3 (6.4), we will not cover federated PMLs/PSEEs.

As mentioned, we will base ourselves on previous CAGIS work. Typical tools are models editors, analyzers and interpreters, with special agents to perform various functions. However, there are many aspects to improve, as explained below and in T2.3-T2.4.

Relevant research challenges are:
-- Handling workflow changes when users are off-line.
-- Creating a workflow client accessible and scalable for PDAs, desktop computers etc.
-- Creating workflow views suitable for PDAs.
-- Adapting CAGIS workflow framework to cope in a heterogeneous environment.
-- Adding support for impact and consistency analysis upon changes.
-- Integration with novel transaction models, and their product models.
-- Adding some intelligent agents, e.g. for searching, as oracles, for reasoning or decision making etc.

Internal deliverables: Work notes on formalisms, designs, executable code as a common set of light tools.
External deliverables: Techical reports, MSc/PhD theses, articles.

 

We have previously described the CAGISTrans framework to reason about and specify customized transaction models. This allows user- and application-dependent tailoring of transaction models. Thereby we can adjust the required degree of control to be provided through the transactions. Some situations may, for instance, require strict control for the correctness of data, other may see control as just a burden, and so on.

However, CASISTrans is immature, and integration with process support is mainly lacking. The tools are also here mostly model editors, analyzers and interpreters; see also T2.4.

Relevant research challenges are:

-- Consistency preservation and impact analysis, considering mobility of agents, i.e., how can we exploit
the solutions from distributed DBMSes?

-- How can transactions manage and control human and automated agents without undue restrictions?

-- How to incorporate product models and how to interface to process models?

-- How to achieve transaction and process integration in dynamic and mobile environment?

Deliverables: as for T2.2.

 

The existing CAGIS solution is based on a multi-agent architecture, implemented by Aglets and an XML-based workflow system. The current architecture requires user-clients to be on-line using the system, and user-clients for the agent system is quite computer-demanding. We want to change this architecture to allow users to work off-line on various devices. WML offers a starting point to do this on smaller devices like PDAs and mobile phones. By migrating the agent architecture from IBM-Aglets to Sun-JavaSpaces, the agent architecture can be accessible also for smaller devices and in a much more dynamic way since JavaSpaces is built upon Jini (at least now, this looks to be the most promising platform). Agents can then give further process support for cooperative activities, in addition to the existing XML-based workflow system. This is because the user can configure an agent to represent him/her in cooperative activities like negotiation, coordination, voting, buying/selling etc.

We will also offer a Web-based Model server, containing reusable, XML-based models, using simple Webdav versioning. Some artifact repositories may also be managed by the transaction support in a similar fashion.

All this will support the tools in T2.2 and T2.3.

Relevant research challenges are:

-- Designing and implementing a multi-agent architecture that can run on anything from a desktop

computer to a mobile phone.

-- Using WML to give off-line workflow capabilities to smaller handheld devices.

-- How to cope with synchronization between different devices after working off-line?

-- How to structure, classify, store and search for reusable models; cf. T2.2 and T2.3?

Deliverables: as for T2.2, but possible code will be middleware.

    1. WP3. Empirical Studies (for result R4)

WP3 covers empirical studies on software engineering and remote education., done in two phases.

As mentioned, WP2.1 and WP3 will account for ca. 25% of the work in the project. In addition comes the time of our own students to run experiments. There are half a dozen courses in which we can use own MSc students in a systematic way, e.g. courses in elementary programming, software engineering, software quality and process improvement, software architecture, many project-based courses, computer-assisted education etc.

We envisage two threads: software engineering and remote education, both done in virtual teams in a distributed and mobile setting. These threads are established as formalized scenarios as part of requirements in T2.1 and using technologies from T2.2-T2.4.

To ensure proper validation, we will seek to apply sound techniques for empirical studies (mostly case studies and formal experiments) and to use QGM (see 6.5 for all this). This workpackage must therefore operationalize the evaluation criteria for the scenarios from WP2.1 by defining concrete metrics, operational test plans etc.

Both scenario threads will run in two major phases:

3.1.1 Software engineering scenario, initial.
3.1.2 Remote education scenario, initial.

3.2.1 Software engineering scenario, final.
3.2.2 Remote education scenario, final.

Relevant research challenges are:
- How to control the risks to internal and external validity?
- How to create sufficient realism with a prototype system?
- How to handle the interaction with WP2, setting the premises for the work?

Internal deliverables: Plans for empirical studies (pilots), mid-term evaluation reports, and final reports.
External deliverables: MSc theses, technical reports, articles.

In all WP2-WP3 work will make external presentations and course material of ongoing results, see WP4 below.

    1. WP4: Dissemination and Contact (for result R5)

The material to be dealt with in WP4 mainly comes from WP2 and WP3, typically as published articles, technical reports, and internal research notes. This workpackage may do some additional packing and classification of such material, and also produce new presentation material or course material.

All this material will be stored in the project Web site, covering all relevant MOWAHS documents. We will also try to solicit "cooperative'' comments on the stored material -- i.e., using our "own medicine''.

WP4 covers activities on conferences/travels, courses, a workshop series on virtual organizations, and a Web site:

Our research papers will regularly be presented at scientific seminars, workshops, specialist meetings etc.

Each of the two research groups have a wide collegial network around the research themes of MOWAHS (see Section 8). We expect that the MOWAHS results will be used to consolidate and expand our research network in related areas, and thus improve our standing internationally.

Internal deliverables: Regular travel reports.
External deliverables: Articles and reports from WP2 and WP3.

Such a semi-annual (twice per year) workshop series will be sought established with other researchers within the IKT-2010 program, and possibly with foreign research groups. It may partly be co-located with the planned, annual IKT-2010 event.

Internal deliverables: Meeting summaries, agendas.
External deliverables: Semi-annual seminar presentations.

The experiences and new knowledge gained through MOWAHS will be disseminated in several courses in software engineering and remote education given at NTNU (half a dozen relevant courses) and towards industry (although assuming extra resources from 3rd parties). There is also a NAWUS "Norgesnett for software engineering education", in cooperation with University of Oslo (see Section 8).

External deliverables: New courses and presentation material, after year 2, 3 and 4.

Establish and maintain a Web-based, project- and document archive. This will store all project material, both for internal and external use. Actual filling-up is done elsewhere, such as WP2-3 and T4.1-4.3.

Internal deliverables: Web archive templates and guidelines, overall Web structure.
External deliverables: Actual Web contents (from other workpackages and tasks).

 

  1. Partner Description

The partners involved in MOWAHS are:

The prime contact person will be prof. Conradi.

The NTNU software engineering group have previously been working on software reuse, configuration management, software engineering databases, process modelling, software process improvement, software quality, and software engineering education. See further details in Section 8.1.

The NTNU database group have previously been working on general and special databases, distributed and mobile systems, operating systems and distributed systems (middleware), storage media, and storage systems. Some important subfields thereof are architecture, data modelling, storage structures, and transactions including novel transaction models. See further details in Section 8.2.

These two research groups involved have had formal and informal project cooperation for the last 3.5 years in the CAGIS project.

See Enclosure 3 for Curriculum Vitaes and Publication Lists.

    1. IDI software engineering group: closer description
    2. IDI has had a software engineering group for almost 15 years. It has 2 full professors, 1 associate professor, and 1 part-time teacher, and 8 PhD students (4 with fellowships).

      The NTNF-supported project EPOS (1986-91) had software process as one of the foci the last 3 years of the project.

      The group has further participated in many international projects (ACM, REBOOT, SER, PROTEUS, ASSET, partly PERFECT, RENAISSANCE, PROMOTER, PROMOTER-2, CMEX, AMEX) where software process, software quality, heterogeneity and cooperation have been a relevant component.

      Many PhD students over the last 10 years has worked on topics related to the MOWAHS topic. Recently, PhD student Alf Inge Wang in the CAGIS project has been working on XML-based and agent-based process architectures to support cooperation.

      The group has acquired much competence and has an internationally acknowledged position in software engineering. It has close contacts with Norwegian software producers and end-users, and with international colleagues. It has arranged international workshops in software configuration management in 1991 (SCM'3) and in process modelling in 1992 (EWSPT'92), and the group leader has been program chair for similar workshops in 1997 (SCM'7) and 2000 (EWSPT'2000).

      Thus, we feel that the proposed MOWAHS project in an excellent way can consolidate and improve the technology fundament that the group has built up during the last 12 years of research.

    3. IDI database group: closer description

Currently the group has 2 full professors, 1 associate professor, 1 adjunct full professor, and 6 PhD fellows.

The more recent research topics have been:

During the period 1996-99 the production has been 2 PhD and 38 MSc candidates.

The externally financed research projects in the same period were: CAGIS (NFR), OMODIS (NFR), LAVA (NFR & TeleNor), ELVIRA (TeleNor & Eurescom), and MUSEUMSFILM (Norsk museumsutvikling & Norsk folkemuseum).

  1. Associated Activities and Projects

In addition to the present MOWAHS proposal and associated, university-funded research activities, we will try to exploit MOWAHS synergistically with the following ongoing and planned initiatives:

These other projects and initiatives is expected to strengthen the effect of the proposed project.

  1. References to Sections 2--9
  2. [AAA+96] Gustavo Alonso, Divyakant Agrawal, Amr El Abbadi, Mohan Kamath, Roger Günthër, and C. Mohan. Advanced transaction models in workflow contexts. In Proc. Int'l Conf. on Data Engineering (ICDE'96), pages 574-581, 1996.

    [Ad99] Ad Astra Engineering Inc. Jumping Beans -- The Mobility Framework. Web: http://www.JumpingBeans.com, 1999.

    [AHS91] Tim Andrews, Craig Harris, and Kiril Sinkel. ONTOS: A Persistent Database for C++. In In [GH91], chapter 21, pages 387-406. Prentice-Hall, 1991.

    [B+97] R. Bentley et al. Basic Support for Cooperative Work on the World Wide Web (on BSCW). International Journal of Human Computer Studies: Special issue on Novel Applications of the WWW, Spring 1997, 20 p.

    [Bak97] Sean Baker. CORBA Distributed Objects -- Using Orbix. ACM press and Addison-Wesley, 1997.
    ISBN 0-201-92475-7.

    [BCN+96] C. Basile, S. Calanna, E. Nitto, A. Fuggetta, and M. Gemo. Mechanisms and Policies for Federated PSEEs: Basic Concepts and Open Issues. In Carlo Montangero, editor, Proceedings of the 5th European Workshop on Software Process Technology, Springer Verlag LNCS 1149, pages 86-91, Nancy, France, October 1996.

    [BCV00] Luca Bompani, Paolo Ciancarini, and Fabio Vitali. Software Engineering and the Internet: A Roadmap. In Anthony Finkelstein, editor, The Future of Software Engineering, ACM Press Order No. 592000-1, pages 305-315. (Supplementory Proc. at 22th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE’200) , Limerick, Ireland, 4-11 June 2000.)

    [BCR94] Victor R. Basili, Gianluigi Caldiera, and Hans-Dieter Rombach. The Goal Question Metric Paradigm. In [Mar94], pages 528-532, 1994.

    [BDG+94] Alexandros Biliris, Shaul Dar, Narain H. Gehani, H. V. Jagadish, and Krithi Ramamritham. ASSET: A system for supporting extended transactions. In Richard T. Snodgrass and Marianne Winslett, editors, Proc. ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD'94), pages 44-54. ACM Press, May 1994.

    [Ber96] Philip A. Bernstein. Middleware: A Model for Distributed System Services. Communications of the ACM, Volume 39, Number 2, pages 86-98, February 1996.

    [Bjø00] Bjørn Haakenstad. GlueServer, support for integrating workflow-systems with interactive agents, March 2000. EPOS TR 375, 71 p., Dept. of Computer and Information Science.

    [BJP94] Michael Brodie, M. Jarke, and M. Papazoglou, editors. Proc. of the 2nd International Conference of Cooperative Information Systems, Toronto, Canada, May 1994.

    [BK91] Naser S. Barghouti and Gail E. Kaiser. Concurrency Control in Advanced Database Applications.
    ACM Computing Surveys, 23(3):269-317, September 1991.

    [BSH86] Victor R. Basili, Richard W. Selby, and David H. Hutchens. Experimentation in Software Engineering. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, SE-12(7):733-743, July 1986.

    [BSK95] Israel Ben-Shaul and Gail E. Kaiser. A Paradigm for Decentralized Process Modeling. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/Dordrecht/London, 1st edition, 1995.

    [BT98] Gregory Alan Bolcer and Richard N. Taylor. Advanced Workflow Managment Technologies. SOFTWARE PROCESS -- Improvement and Practice, 4(2):125-171, 1998.

    [C+94] Reidar Conradi et al. EPOS: Object-Oriented and Cooperative Process Modelling. In [FKN94], pages 33-70, 1994. Also as EPOS TR 198, NTH, 31 Oct. 1993, Trondheim.

    [CC98] Chunnian and Reidar Conradi. Process View of CSCW. In Proc. Int'l Symposium of Future Software Technologies (ISFST'98), Hangzhow, P.R. China, 28-30 Oct. 1998, 1998. Also as SU-report 11/98, IDI, NTNU.

    [CDE+00] Pierre-Yves Cunin, Sami Dami, Jacky Estublier, Gianpaolo Cugola, Alfonso Fuggetta, H. Verjus, F. Pacull, and M. Rivière. Support for Software Federations: The PIE Platform. In Reidar Conradi, editor, Proc. 8th European Software Process Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'2000), Kaprun (Salzburg), Austria, 21-25 Feb. 2000, pages 38-52. Springer Verlag LNCS 1780, February 2000.

    [CG98] Gianpaulo Cugola and Carlo Ghezzi. Software Processes: a Retrospective and a Path to the Future. SOFTWARE PROCESS -- Improvement and Practice, 4(2):101-123, 1998.

    [Cic98] Andrzej Cichocki. Migrating workflows and their transactional properties. PhD thesis, University of Houston, USA, December 1998, 178 p.

    [CLH95] Reidar Conradi, Chunnian Liu, and Marianne Hagaseth. Planning Support for Cooperating Transactions in EPOS. Information Systems, 20(4):317-326, June 1995.

    [CNF98] Gianpaolo Cugola, Elisabetta Di Nitto, and Alfonso Fuggetta. Exploiting an event-based infrastructure to develop complex distributed systems. In Proc. 20th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE'98), Kyoto, Japan, April 1998. IEEE CS Press.

    [Cor92] Digital Equipment Corp. DEC Object/DB System Overview and Glossary (ULTRIX), Version 1.0, September 1992.

    [Cor00] Toshiba Corporation. Multi-Agent Framework for 100% Pure Agent System. Web: http://www2.toshiba.co.jp/beegent/, 2000.

    [CR94] Panos K. Chrysanthis and Krithi Ramamritham. Synthesis of extended transaction models using ACTA. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 19(3):450-491, September 1994.

    [CRW96] Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, and Washington. Microsoft DCOM: A Technical Overview. Web: http://www.eu.microsoft.com/ windows/downloads/bin/nts/DCOMtec.exe, 1996.

    [CRW98] Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, and Washington. Microsoft Component Services: A Technology Overview. Web: http://www.microsoft.com/com/wpaper/compsvcs.asp, 1998.

    [CW97] Reidar Conradi and Bernhard Westfechtel. Version Models for Software Configuration Management. ACM Computing Surveys, July 1997, Vol. 30, No. 2, pages 232-282.

    [CW00] Paolo Ciancarini and Michael Woodridge. Workshop of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering (resume). Proc. 22nd Int’l Conf. of Software Engineering (ICSE’2000), 7-11 June 2000, Limerick, Ireland, IEEE CS Press, p. 816-817. Also as separate Proc. from ICSE’2000 workshop no. 16, see also http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~mjw/aose2000/.

    [D+97] Monica Divitini et al. The CAGIS requirements and some scenarios (internal working document), September 1997. ca. 15 p.

    [DEA98] S. Dami, J. Estublier, and M. Amiour. APEL: A Graphical Yet Executable Formalism for Process Modeling. In Process Technology edited by E. Nitto and Alfonso Fuggetta, pages 61-96, 1998, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    [DGL87] Klaus R. Dittrich, W. Gotthard, and P. C. Lockemann. DAMOKLES -- The Database System for the UNIBASE Software Engineering Environment. Database Engineering, 10(1), March 1987.

    [DK99] Stephen E. Dossick and Gail E. Kaiser. Distributed Software Development with CHIME (for multimedia teaching). Proc. ICSE’99 2nd Workshop on Software Engineering over the Internet, May 1999, Los Angeles. http://www.psl.cs.columbia.edu/papers/CUCS-007-99.html.

    [DT93] Flavio DePaoli and Francesco Tisato. Language Constructs for Cooperative Systems Design. In [SP93], pages 329-343, 1993.

    [EC94] Jacky Estublier and Ruby Casallas. The Adele Software Configuration Manager. In [Tic94], pages 2-11. John Wiley, 1994.

    [E+99] Frank Eliassen et al. Next Generation Middleware: Requirements, Architecture and Prototypes", In Proc. 7th IEEE Workshop on Future Trends in Distributed Computing Systems, pages 60-65, IEEE CS Press, Dec. 1999.

    [Edw99] W.K. Edwards. Core Jini. Prentice-Hall, 1999. Sun Microsystems Inc.

    [EGR91] Clarence A. Ellis, S. J. Gibbs, and G. L. Rein. Groupware -- Some Issues and Experiences. Comm. of the ACM, 34:39-58, January 1991.

    [Elm92] Ahmed K. Elmagarmid, editor. Database Transaction Models For Advanced Applications. Morgan Kaufmann, 650 p., 1992.

    [Emm00a] Wolfgang Emmerich: Engineering Distributed Objects. John Wiley, April 2000, ISBN 0-471-986-577, 390 p.

    [Emm00b] Wolfgang Emmerich: Software Engineering and Middleware: A Roadmap. In Anthony Finkelstein, editor, The Future of Software Engineering, ACM Press Order No. 592000-1, pages 119-129. (Supplementory Proc. at 22th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE’200) , Limerick, Ireland, 4-11 June 2000.)

    [Est99] Jacky Estublier. Distributed Objects for Concurrent Engineering. In Jacky Estublier, editor, Proc. 9th Int'l Workshop on Software Configuration Management (SCM'99) -- in conjunction with ESEC'99, Toulouse, France, September 1999. Springer Verlag LNCS 1675, pages 192—196.

    [FHA99] E. Freeman, S. Hupfer, and K. Arnold. JavaSpaces Principles, Patterns, and Practice. Addison Wesley, June 1999. Sun Microsystems Inc.

    [FKN94] Anthony Finkelstein, Jeff Kramer, and Bashar A. Nuseibeh, editors. Software Process Modelling and Technology. Advanced Software Development Series, Research Studies PressJohn Wiley & Sons, 1994. ISBN 0-86380-169-2, 362 p.

    [FO89] A. Farrag and M. Ozsu. Using Semantic Knowledge of Transactions to Increase Concurrency.
    ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 14(4):503-525, December 1989.

    [Fug00] Alfonso Fuggetta. Software Process: A Roadmap. In Anthony Finkelstein, editor, The Future of Software Engineering, ACM Press Order No. 592000-1, pages 27-34. (Supplementory Proc. at 22th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE’200) , Limerick, Ireland, 4-11 June 2000.)

    [FZ89] Mary F. Fernandez and Stanley B. Zdonik. Transaction groups: A Model for Controlling Cooperative Work. In 3rd International Workshop on Persistent Object Systems, Their Design, Implementation and Use., pages 341-350, January 1989.

    [GCC+96] Claude Godart, G. Canals, F. Charoy, P. Molli, and H. Skaf. Designing and Implementing COO: Design Process, Architectural Style, Lessons Learned. In Proc. 18th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE'96), pages 342-352. IEEE-CS Press, March 25-29 1996.

    [GH91] Rajiv Gupta and Ellis Horowitz, editors. Object-Oriented Databases with Applications to CASE, Networks and VLSI CAD. Prentice-Hall series in Data and Knowledge Base Systems. Prentice-Hall, 1991. ISBN 0-13-629833-8.

    [GHM96] Dimitrios Georgakopoulos, Mark F. Hornick, and Frank Manola. Customizing transaction models and mechanisms in a programmable environment supporting reliable workflow automation. ACM Transactions on Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 8(4):630-649, August 1996.

    [Gla99] Graham Glass. ObjectSpace, Overview of Voyager: ObjectSpace's Product Family for State-of-the-Art Distributed Computing. White paper, ObjectSpace, 1999. Available on Web: http://www.objectspace.com/products /documentation/VoyagerOverview.pdf.

    [GMS87] H. Garcia-Molina and K. Salem. Sagas. In ACM Conference on Management of Data, pages 249-259, May 1987.

    [Gra819] Jim N. Gray. The transaction concept: Virtues and limitations. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Very Large Databases, pages 144-154, September 1981.

    [Gru94] J. Grudin. Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: History and Focus. In IEEE Computer, number 5 in 27, pages 19-26, 1994.

    [GSSS92] Yaron Goldberg, Marilyn Safran, William Silverman, and Ehud Shapiro. Active Mail: A Framework for Integrated Groupware Applications. In D. Coleman, editor, Groupware'92, pages 222-224. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1992.

    [HHW99] R. S. Hall, Dennis Heimbigner, and Alexander L. Wolf. A Cooperative Approach to Support Deployment Using the Software Dock. In Proc. Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE'99), pages 174-183, Los Angeles, USA, May 1999. IEEE CS Press.

    [HN00] Anders Aas Hanssen and Bård Smidsrød Nymoen. DIAS II -- Distributed Intelligent Agent System II, January 2000. EPOS TR 372 (diploma thesis), 324 p., Dept. of Computer and Information Science.

    [Hol98] Steven Holzner. XML Complete. McGraw-Hill, 1998. ISBN 0-07-913702-4.

    [IKV00] IKV. The Agent Platform. Web: http://www.ikv.de/products/, 2000.

    [Jab93] Stefan Jablonski. Transaction Support for Activity Management. In Proc. of International Workshop on High Performance Transaction Systems (HPTS'93), page 10, Asilomar, CA, 1993.

    [JK97] Sushil Jajodia and Larry Kerschberg. Advanced Transaction Models and Architectures. Kluwer Academic Publisher, 381 p., 1997.

    [Kai90] Gail E. Kaiser. A flexible transaction model for software engineering. In Proc. 6th International Conference on Data Engineering, pages 560-567, Los Angeles, CA, February 1990. IEEE Computer Society. Invited paper.

    [KFF+90] Marc I. Kellner, Peter H. Feiler, Anthony Finkelstein, Takuya Katayama, Leon Osterweil, Maria Penedo, and H. Dieter Rombach. Software Process Modeling Problem (for ISPW6), August 1990.

    [KGBW90] W. Kim, J. F. Garza, N. Ballou, and D. Woelk. Architecture of the ORION Next-Generation Database System. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2(1), March 1990.

    [Kho93] S. Khoshafian. Object-Oriented Databases. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1993.

    [Kim95] Won Kim, editor. Modern Database Systems: The Object Model, Interoperability, ands Beyond. Addison-Wesley and ACM Press, 1995. ISBN 0-201-59098-0, 705 p.

    [KK00] Lars Killingdal and Mufrid Krilic. Programmerbare transaksjoner -- prosjektoppgave, April 2000. Student project report (pre-diploma), 133 p.

    [KKB85] H. Korth, W. Kim, and F. Bancilhon. A Model of CAD Transactions. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Very Large Databases, pages 25-33, 1985.

    [KKB88] H. Korth, W. Kim, and F. Bancilhon. On Long-Duration CAD Transactions. Information Science, October 1988. Also in [ZE90].

    [KP91] Gail E. Kaiser and Calton Pu. Dynamic Restructuring of Transactions. In [Elm92], pages 265-295. Morgan Kaufmann, 1991.

    [LA97] Danny B. Lange and Yariv Aridor. Agent Transfer Protocol -- ATP/0.1. Technical report, IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory, March 19 1997.
    Available on Web:http://www.trl.ibm.co.jp/aglets/atp/atp.htm.

    [Lan97] Danny B. Lange. Java Aglet Application Programming Interface (J-AAPI) White Paper -- Draft 2. Technical report, IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory, February 19 1997. Available on Web: http://www.trl.ibm.co.jp/aglets/JAAPI-whitepaper.html.

    [Leb94] David B. Leblang. The CM Challenge: Configuration Management that Works. In [Tic94], chapter 1, pages 1-37. John Wiley, 1994.

    [Lee89] Allen S. Lee. A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies. MIS Quarterly, 13(1):33-50, March 1989.

    [LLOW91] Charles Lamb, Gordon Landis, Jack Orenstein, and Dan Weinreb. The ObjectStore Database System. Comm. of the ACM, 34(10):50-63, October 1991.

    [LO98] Danny Lange and Mitsuru Oshima. Programming and deploying Java mobile agents with Aglets. Addison-Wesley, 1998.

    [LvKRH90] Ernst Lutz, Hans von Kleist-Retzow, and Karl Hoernig. MAFIA -- An Active Mail-Filter-Agent for an Intelligent Document Processing Support. In S. Gibbs and A.A. Verrijn-Stuart, editors, IFIP, North-Holland, 1990. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

    [M+00] Frank Maurer et al., organizers. Proc. 3rd Workshop of Software Engineering over the Internet, 88 p. As workshop no. 11 at 22nd Int’l Conf. of Software Engineering (ICSE’2000), 7-11 June 2000, Limerick, Ireland. See also http://sern.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~maurer/icse2000ws/ICSE2000WS.html.

    [Mar94] John J. Marciniak, editor. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering -- 2 Volume Set. John Wiley and Sons, 1994.

    [MDP98] M. Matskin, M. Divitini, and S. Petersen. An Architecture for Multi-Agent Support in a Distributed Information Technology Application. In International Workshop on Intelligent Agents in Information and Process Management, page 12, Bremen, Germany, 15-17 September 1998.

    [Mic99a] Sun Microsystems. Java Remote Method Invocation (RMI). Web: http://www.sun.com/products/jdk/1.2/ docs/guide/rmi/, 1999.

    [Mic99b] SUN Microsystems. JavaSpaces TM Specification. White paper, SUN Microsystems, January 25 1999. Available on Web: http://www.sun.com/jini/specs/js.pdf.

    [Mic00] Sun Microsystems. Community resources (Jini Specification). Web: http://www.sub.com/jini/specs, 2000.

    [Moh94] C. Mohan. Tutorial: Advanced transaction models -- survey and critique. In Richard T. Snodgrass and Marianne Winslett, editors, Proc. ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD'94), pages 521-521, May 1994.

    [Mos82] J. Eliot B. Moss. Nested transactions and reliable computing. In Proc Second IEEE Symposium on Reliability in Distributed Software and Database Systems, pages 33-39, August 1982.

    [Mos85] J. Eliot B. Moss. Nested Transactions: An Approach to reliable Distributed Computing. Information Systems Series. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1985. (PhD thesis from 1981 at MIT).

    [Not85] David Notkin. The GANDALF Project. The Journal of Systems and Software, 5(2):91-105, May 1985.

    [NRZ92] M.H. Nodine, S. Ramoswamy, and S. Zdonik. A Cooperative Transaction Model for Design Databases. In [Elm92], pages 59-86. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.

    [OKO98] Mitsuru Oshima, Guenther Karjoth, and Kouichi Ono. Aglets Specification 1.1 Draft. Technical report, IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory, September 8 1998. Available on Web: http://www.trl.ibm.co.jp/aglets/spec11.html.

    [OMG97] OMG. CORBA Components: Join Initial Submission. ftp: ftp://ftp.omg.org/pub/docs/orbos/97-11-24.pdf, 1997.

    [Orl92] W.J. Orlikowski. Learning from Notes: Organizational Issues in Groupware Implementation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW'92, pages 362-369, Toronto, Canada, 1992. The Association for Computer Machinery, ACM Press.

    [PHBN99] Geir Prestegård, Anders Aas Hanssen, Snorre Brandstadmoen, and Bård Smidsrød Nymoen. DIAS -- Distributed Intelligent Agent System, April 1999. EPOS TR 359 (pre-diploma project thesis), 396 p. + CD, Dept. of Computer and Information Science, NTNU, Trondheim.

    [PMC96] ICL Enterprises Process Management Centre, Enterprise Technology. ProcessWise Integrator, PML Reference. Staffordshire, UK, first edition, April 1996.

    [RPM00] Gruia-Catalin Roman, Gian Pietro Picco, and Amy L. Murphy. Software Engineering for Mobility: A Roadmap. In Anthony Finkelstein, editor, The Future of Software Engineering, ACM Press Order No. 592000-1, pages 243-258. (Supplementory Proc. at 22th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE’200) , Limerick, Ireland, 4-11 June 2000.)

    [RDP99] Heri Ramampiaro, Monica Divitini, and Sobah Abbas Petersen. Agent-based groupware: Challenges for cooperative transaction models. In Jacky Estublier, editor, Proc. International Process Technology Workshop (IPTW'99), pages 18-24, Grenoble, September 1999.

    [Rei90] Steven P. Reiss. Connecting tools using message passing in the field environment. IEEE Software, July 1990.

    [RN99] Heri Ramampiaro and Mads Nygård. Cooperative database system: A constructive review of cooperative transaction models. In Yahiko Kambayashi and Hiroki Takakura, editors, Proc. 1999 International Symposium on Database Application in Non-Traditional Environment (DANTE'99), pages 315-324, Kyoto, Japan, November 1999. IEEE CS Press.

    [RN00a] Heri Ramampiaro and Mads Nygård. CAGISTrans: A transaction framework to support cooperating agents, May 2000. IDI Technical Report 5/00, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim. 22 p.

    [RN00b] Heri Ramampiaro and Mads Nygård. CAGISTrans: Supporting cooperating agents using customisable transaction models, May 2000. Draft paper, IDI, NTNU, Trondheim.

    [SB92] Kjeld Schmidt and Liam Bannon. Taking CSCW seriously -- supporting articulation work. Computer Supported Work. An International Journal, 1(1-2):7-40, 1992.

    [SC98] Dag Sjøberg and Reidar Conradi. NAWUS: NAsjonal Web-database for Undervisning i Systemutvikling, August 1998. Forslag til Arbeidsgruppen for digitale læremidler.

    [SD97] Carla Simone and Monica Divitini. Ariadne: Supporting Coordination through a Flexible Use of the Knowledge on Work Process. Journal UCS (Electronic Journal), 3(8), 1997. Also as NTNU/SU-report 23/97 and at http://www.iicm.edu/jucs_3_8.

    [Sel00] Rune Selvåg. Web-transactions, January 2000. MSc thesis, Dept. Computer and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

    [Ska89] Andrea Skarra. Concurrency Control for Cooperating Transactions in an Object-oriented Database. SIGPLAN Notices, 24(4):466-473, February 1989.

    [SP93] Ian Sommerville and Manfred Paul, editors. Proc. 4th European Software Engineering Conference (Garmisch-Partenkirchen, FRG), Springer Verlag LNCS 717, 516 p., September 1993.

    [SW00] Terje Salvesen and Jan Waage. DIAS III -- Distributed Intelligent Agent System Using JavaSpaces, April 2000. EPOS TR 390 (pre-diploma project thesis), IDI, NTNU, 139 p.

    [Tia98] Pierre F. Tiako. Modelling the Federation of Process Sensitive Engineering Environments: Basic Concepts and Perspectives. In Volker Gruhn, editor, 6th European Workshop on Software Process Technologies, Springer Verlag LNCS 1487, pages 132-136, Weybridge (London), UK, 16-18 September 1998.

    [Tic94] Walter F. Tichy, editor. Configuration Management. (Trends in software). John Wiley, 1994. ISBN 0-471-94245-6.

    [Tic98] Walter F. Tichy. Should Computer Scientists Experiment More? IEEE Computer, 31(5):32-40, May 1998.

    [Wan99] Alf Inge Wang. Experience paper: Using XML to implement a workflow tool. In 3rd Annual IASTED International Conference Software Engineering and Applications, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA, 6-8 October 1999.

    [Wan00] Alf Inge Wang. Support for Mobile Software Processes in CAGIS. In Seventh European Workshop on Software Process Technology, Kaprun near Salzburg, Austria, 22-25 February 2000.

    [WAP99] WAP Forum. Wireless Application Protocol, Wireless Markup Language Specification Version 1.2. Technical report, Wireless Application Protocol Forum, Ltd, November 4 1999.

    [WfM00] WfMC. Workflow Standard -- Interoperability Wf-XML Binding. Technical report, The Workflow Management Coalition, May 1 2000. Document Number WFMC-TC-1023, see http://www.wfmc.org.

    [Whi96] Jim White. Mobile Agents White Paper. Technical report, General Magic, 1996. Available by http://www.ai.univie.ac.at/paolo/lva/vu-sa/html/white_whitepaper/.

    [WLC99] Alf Inge Wang, Chunnian Liu, and Reidar Conradi. A Multi-Agent Architecture for Cooperative Software Engineering. In Proc. of The Eleventh International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE'99), pages 1-22, Kaiserslautern, Germany, 17-19 June 1999.

    [WLCM98] Alf Inge Wang, Jens-Otto Larsen, Reidar Conradi, and Bjørn Munch. Improving Cooperation Support in the EPOS CM System. In Volker Gruhn, editor, Proc. EWSPT'98, Weybridge (London), 18-19. Sept. 1998, Springer Verlag LNCS 1487, pages 75-91, September 1998.

    [WS92] Gerhard Weikum and Hans-J. Schek. Concepts and applications of multilevel transactions and open nested transaction, pages 350-397. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.

    [WW98] E. James Whitehead and Meredith Wiggins. WEBDAV: IETF Standard for Collaborative Authoring on the Web (Web-based Distributed Authoring and Versioning). IEEE Internet Computing, pages 34-40, Sept./Oct. 1998.

    [XML99] XML.COM. XML.COM -- XML Implementations. http://www.xml.com/xml/pub/Guide/XML_Implementations, 1999. (C) Seybold Publications and O'Reilly and Associates, Inc.

    [Yeo96] Benjamin Yeomans. Enhancing the world wide Web. Technical report, Computer Science dept., University of Manchester, 1996. Supervisor: Prof. Brian Warboys.

    [Yin94] Robert K. Yin. Case Study Research Design and Methods. Sage Publications, John Wiley and Sons, London, UK, 1994.

    [YL99] Jeong-Joon Yoo and Dong-Ik Lee. X-MAS: Mobile Agent Platform for Workflow Systems with Time Constraints. In The Fourth International Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems, Tokyo, Japan, 20-23 March 1999.

    [ZE90] Stanley B. Zdonik and David Maier (Eds.). Readings in Object-Oriented Database Systems (collected articles). The Morgan Kaufman series in Data Management Systems. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Los Altos, CA., 1990. ISBN 0-55860-000-0, ISSN 1046-1698.

    [ZW98] Marvin V. Zelkowitz and Dolores R. Wallace. Experimental Models for Validating Technology.
    IEEE Computer, 31(5):23-31, May 1998.

     

  3. Enclosure 3: Curriculum Vitaes and Publication Lists
    1. CV for Reidar Conradi, software engineering group

NAME: Reidar Conradi.

BORN: 23 July 1946, Oslo. Norway.

EDUCATION:
M.Sc. (1970), Ph.D. (1976) -- both from NTH (now NTNU), Trondheim.
Courses in Didactics and Technical writing, 1972-1985.

PRESENT JOB and WORK ADDRESS:
Professor at Dept. of Computer Science and Informatics (IDI)
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
N-7491 Trondheim, Norway

Phone +47 73 593444, Fax +47 73 594466, Email conradi@idi.ntnu.no
Leads software engineering group of 10 people at IDI.

HOME ADDRESS: Skule Baardsons gate 11, N-7052 Trondheim, Norway. Phone +47 73.935862.

LANGUAGE SKILLS:
Fluent in Norwegian and English, good in German, passable in French,
some Italian from summer courses in Perugia 1992-94.

SCIENTIFIC PROFILE:
Programming languages, (prev. operating systems), software engineering, database support for CASE, configuration management, software process modelling, software process improvement, software quality, object-orientation and reuse, some knowledge-based support, distributed information systems.150.000 lines of programs written in Fortran, Algol, Simula, Mary, Bliss, Ada, Chill, C/C++, and Java.

Per May 2000:
130 int'l published papers, 18 nat'l ones, 4 textbooks and 13 booklets, over 20 compendia, almost 100 technical reports.

JOBS HELD and STAYS ABROAD:

1972-75 Research scientist at SINTEF, Trondheim.
1975-79 Assistant professor at NTH, Trondheim.
1979-85 Associate professor at NTH.
1980-81 Visiting scientist at CMU, Pittsburgh.
(1981-83 Partly sick due to a back problem.)
1985- Full professor at NTH.
1985-87 Head of new Dept. of Computer Systems and Telematics (IDT), NTH.
1990 Guest researcher at U. of Pisa and at ENSIMAG, May-June 1990.
1997-98 Head of new Dept. of Computer and Information Science (IDI), NTNU.
1999-2000 Sabbatical stay at U. of Maryland (9 months) and Politecnico di Milano (2 months).

PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES:

1976- Member of IFIP WG2.4 on Systems Programming Languages.

1984-86 Work to initiate Norway's IT-program in 1987-90.

1985-99 Representative in the Norwegian Informatics Council.

1986 Organizer of International Workshop on Advanced Programming Environments,

Trondheim, 16-18 June 1986.

1988-90 Program chair for 1st,2nd,3rd Norwegian Informatics Conf.

90-93,95-96 Chair for Norwegian Informatics Council.

1991 Conf. chair 3rd Int'l SCM Workshop, Trondheim,12-14 June 1991.

1991 Co-arranger of 1st European SW Process Workshop, Milan, 30-31 May 1991.

1992 General chair for 2nd European SW Process Workshop, Trondheim, 7-8 Sept. 1992.

1997 Program chair for SCM'6 in Boston, May 1997.

1997- Member of ISERN, research network on Software Experimentation, coord. by U. Kaiserslautern.

1998- Nat'l NAWUS educ. network for System Dev., w/ prof. Dag Sjøberg, Univ. Oslo.

1999 Member of NFR committee to plan new, strategic IT program.

2000 Program chair for EWSPT'7 in Salzburg, Feb. 2000.

PC member of many workshops/conferences, e.g. the series SCM, EWSPT, SSR, partly ICSE, SIGSOFT and ESEC -- usually 4-5 memberships per year. Also in many univ. and nat'l committees.

PROJECTS etc.:

1972-99 Textbooks and teaching. Tutored 180 M.Sc. and 12 Ph.D. students.

Responsible for 2 MSc courses and 2 PhD courses.

1972-78 MARY programming language and its operating system.

1980-81 Production Quality Compiler-Compiler (PQCC), and SPICE at CMU.

1983-86 FORTRAN VERIFIER for error diagnosis and documentation of F-77 programs,

NTNF-supported.

1986-90 Project leader EPOS project with Veritas Research/Norsk Data, NTNF-supported.

1990-92 Bilateral ACM project NTH and LGI-ENSIMAG.

1991-94 Program leader of REBOOT National Strategic Technology Program in Norway.

1990-95 ESPRIT projects REBOOT, SER, PROTEUS, PROMOTER BRA and ASSET.

1996-99 ESPRIT projects PROMOTER2, CMEX, AMEX, and RENAISSANCE.

1996-99 Nat'l CAGIS basic R&D project on distributed information systems, coordinator.

1996-99 Nat'l SPIQ pre-project/main industrial project on software process improvement, initiator.

1998-2002 Nat'l CSE-project on supercomputing, w/ OO modelling aspects, PhD advisor.

1999-2002 Nat'l KVALIS-project on quality of medical journal systems, co-worker.

    1. Nat'l PROFIT industrial project on software process improvement, co-initiator.

CONTACTS:

Especially with U. Karlsruhe, RWTH Aachen, U. Manchester, Imperial College, U. Linkøping, U. Lund, U. Grenoble, U. Pisa, P. di Milano, P. di Torino, CMU, U.Maryland, and BPU in Beijing through guest researchers and students. Also good contact with int'l companies, e.g. Bull, Siemens, Cap, Qlabs, and Intecs. Dozens of Norwegian industrial contacts in SPIQ/PROFIT projects.

    1. CV for M. Letizia Jaccheri, software engineering group
    2. Personalia:

      Maria Letizia Jaccheri, born 24 February 1965, Pisa, Italy.

      Home address:

      Oslovn 6, N-7018 Trondheim, Norway. Phone +47 73.537573.

      Education:

      Master thesis: "Software Development Environment: A Conceptual Model Representing Software Systems'' University of Pisa, Italy, Department of Computer Science, February 1988, supervisor Prof. Vincenzo Ambriola.

      PhD thesis: "Software Process Modeling and Evolution'', Politecnico di Torino, Italy, supervisor Prof. Silvano Gai, January 1994.

      Present job and work address:

      Associate Professor at Dept. of Computer Science and Informatics (IDI), Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), N-7491 Trondheim, Norway, Phone +47 73 593469, Fax +47 73 594466, Email letizia@idi.ntnu.no.

       

      Language skills:

      Italian mother tongue, Norwegian and English proficiency.

      Scientific profile:

      Software Engineering field, and particularly in software process modelling, and Software engineering education. Over 35 international refereed publications.

      Jobs held:

      Last position (from January 1993 to June 1997): Assistant Professor at Politecnico di Torino, Italy (tenure from 1.1.1996).

      From 1988 to 1989: programmer and designer at Tecsiel S.P.A., Pisa Italy.

      Projects:

      EPOS (from 1989 til 1992): Software Process Modelling and Execution Environment based rule-base techniques. At NTH, Trondheim, Prof. Reidar Conradi

      E3 (from 1992 to 1998): Software Process Modelling Environment based on object-oriented modelling, at Politecnico di Torino, Italy.

      Italian National Project ex 40% (from 1994 to 1998) Methodologies for Verification and Validation of Software Product.

      Process Promoter ESPRIT BRA 7082 (from 1992 to 1995). Promoter ESPRIT Working Group "European Research Working Group on Software Process Technology'' (from 1996 to 2000)

      ACTS AC003 VITAL Validation of Integrated Telecommunication Architectures for the Long term (1995-1998). The project had the goal of validating the TINA (Telecommunication Information Network Architecture) architecture.

      Norwegian national project SPIQ (Software Project Improvement for better Quality) (1997-99).

    3. CV for Mads Nygård, database group
    4. NAME: Mads Nygård

      BORN: 22 April 1953 in Mosjøen, Norway.

      HOME ADDRESS: Antonie Loechens vei 3g, N-7020 Trondheim, Norway, +47 72.558335

      EDUCATION:

      1989/90 Dr.Techn. (D.Sc.) -- IDT/NTH; Trondheim, Norway
      1978/79 Siv.Ing. (M.Sc.) -- IDB/NTH; Trondheim, Norway

      PRESENT JOBS:

      Professor at IDI/FIM/NTNU from 1997, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway, +47 73.593470.
      Professor II at IED/TEKNAT/HIS from 1997, Stavanger, Norway.

      EXPERIENCE:

      97-... IDI / NTNU, Trondheim: Full Professor
      97-... IED / HIS, Stavanger: Adjunct Professor (prof. II)
      94-97 IMF / NLH, Ås: Adjunct Professor (prof. II)
      96-97 SINTEF Telecom & Informatics Principal Research Scientist, Comp. Science Department
      93-96 SINTEF DELAB Principal Research Scientist, Database Techn. Section
      91-93 SINTEF DELAB Research Manager, Database Technology Section
      89-91 ELAB-RUNIT/SINTEF Research Manager, Database Technology Section
      88-89 RUNIT-F/SINTEF Research Scientist, Database Technology Section
      88-88 AIT: Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand Visiting Faculty, Div. of CS
      87-88 RUNIT-F/SINTEF Research Scientist, Database Technology Section
      85-87 RUNIT/SINTEF Section Head, Parallel Technology Section
      84-85 BIS: Beijing Institute of Software, Beijing, China Visiting Faculty, Division of Computer Science
      83-84 RUNIT/SINTEF Research Scientist, Computer Networks Section
      81-83 IDB / NTH University Fellow
      79-81 IDB / NTH Assistant Professor
      79-79 IDB / NTH Research Assistant
      79-79 COMTEC/NOBØ Systems Programmer

      SPECIAL ACTIVITIES:

      99-... Member of the Board of Directors, IDI
      99-... Chairman of the Curriculum Committee, IDI
      98-99 Member of the Curriculum Committee, IDI
      98-99 Chairman of the Curriculum Committee, IDI/ITEM
      97-98 Member of the Curriculum Committee, IDI/ITEM
      98-99 Member of the Curriculum Committee, FIM
      99-... Member of the Educational Council, NTNU
      89-93 Member of the Board of Directors, SINTEF
      81-83 Member of the Department Council, NTH
      79-81 Member of the Curriculum Committee, IDB
      79-80 Member of the Research Committee, IDB/NTH
      97-99 Member of the Board of Directors, NIF-NORWAY
      97-99 Chairman of the Techn. Board, NIF-NORWAY
      95-97 Vice-Chairman of the Techn. Board, NIF-NORWAY
      93-95 Member of the Techn. Board, NIF-NORWAY
      97-99 Member of the Election Committee, NIF-TRONDHEIM
      95-97 Member of the Techn. Committee, NIF-TRONDHEIM
      94-97 Chairman of the Board, NIF-TRONDHEIM
      93-94 Vice-Chairman of the Board, NIF-TRONDHEIM
      92-93 Member of the Board, NIF-TRONDHEIM
      91-99 Member of the Representative Council, NIF-NORWAY
      91-93 Member of the Priv. Sector's Board, NIF-NORWAY
      90-91 Vice-Mem. of the Priv. Sector's Board, NIF-NORWAY
      88-90 Chairman of the Board, NIF-SINTEF
      87-88 Member of the Board, NIF-SINTEF
      87-88 Chairman of the Negotiation Committee, NIF-SINTEF
      86-87 Member of the Negotiation Committee, NIF-SINTEF
      89-90 Elected Representative, NIF-ELAB-RUNIT
      87-89 Elected Representative, NIF-RUNIT-F
      85-87 Elected Representative, NIF-RUNIT

      SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS:

      97: Selected to Evaluate Papers for an Int'l Conf. in the Chech Republic.
      97: Selected to Evaluate Papers for an Int'l Conf. in Norway.
      95-00: Member of an several Evaluation Committee for Professorships in Norway.
      94: Awarded 1-out-of-10 Best Papers at ACIS'94, 5th Australasian Conference on Information Systems.
      94: Appointed Session Chairman at SCCC'94, 14th Int'l Conf. of the Chilean CS Society.
      94: Offered to hold a Technical Tutorial on "Transaction Management'' at SCCC'96, 16th Int'l Conf. of the
      Chilean CS Society.
      92: Initiated, Organized and Managed a Panel Debate on "Road Transport Informatics -- Past, Present and
      Future'' with 10 of the World's Top Experts at VNIS'92, 3rd Int'l Conf. on Vehicle Navigation &
      Information Systems.
      92: Appointed Session Chairman at VNIS'92, 3rd Int'l Conf. on Vehicle Navigation & Information
      Systems.
      92: Invited Panelist on "Open Solutions -- Fiction or Fact'' at Norwegian Computer Society's Technology
      Days in Bergen.
      92: Appointed Session Chairman at Norwegian Computer Society's InfoTech'92.

       

      91: Initiated, Organized and Managed two Workshops on "Road Transport Informatics -- New Software
      and Hardware'' with 10 of Norway's and 6 of Germany's Top Experts at Siemens, Germany in Berlin
      and Munich.
      89: Appointed National Expert to OECD on IT in Transportation Engineering -- and worked for 3 years
      with OECD Task Force MC5 on "Evaluative Research of Road-Vehicle Communication Systems''.

      KEY QUALIFICATIONS: (All in Computer Science:)
      10 years experience from Universities as Research Assistant, Assistant Professor, University Fellow, Visiting Faculty, Adjunct Professor and Full Professor. 13 years experience from Research Institutes as Research Scientist, Section Head, Research Manager and Principal Research Scientist. Published several research publications & development reports -- and several text books & lecture notes -- both nationally and internationally. Lectured several courses in universities, research establishments and computer industry, both domestic and abroad, and both at MSc- and PhD-level. Managed and participated in several projects, both research and development, and both nationally and internationally.

      MAIN FIELDS OF COMPETENCE: Database Systems, Operating Systems, Distributed Computing, Parallel Processing, Transportation Informatics, Knowledge Engineering.

      NO. OF PUBLICATIONS: International: 27, National: 40, Local: 38.

      COUNTRIES WORKED IN: Norway, Thailand, China.

      LANGUAGES: Norwegian (native), English (fluent), German, French (limited).

      PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS: NIF: Norwegian Society of Chartered Engineers.

      REFERENCES: University: Professor Kjell Bratbergsengen, IDI/NTNU
      Industry: Vice President Kristen Rekdal, TeleLogic Norway

    5. Publication List for software engineering group
    6. Below follows an excerpt for 1993-2000.

      1993:

      1. Reidar Conradi, M. Letizia Jaccheri, Cristina Mazzi:
      "Variability of Process Models and Processes, and the EPOS Solution'',
      In Wilhelm Schäfer (Ed.): Proc. 8th International Software Process Workshop (ISPW'8), p. 43-46, 2-5 March 1993, Dagstuhl, FRG, IEEE-CS Press.
      Also as EPOS TR 176, NTH, Trondheim, 27. Sept. 1992, 5 p.

      2. Reidar Conradi, M. Letizia Jaccheri:
      "Customization and Evolution of Process Models in EPOS'', p. 23-39.
      In N. Prakash, C. Rolland, B. Pernici (Eds.): "Proc. IFIP 8.1 Working Conference on Information System Development Process (ISDP'93), Como, Italia, 1-3 Sept. 1993'', North-Holland Publ., Amsterdam, 337 p.
      Also as EPOS TR 174, NTH, Trondheim, 30 April 1993 (rev.), 12 p.

      3. Reidar Conradi, Christer Fernström, and Alfonso Fuggetta:
      "A Conceptual Framework for Evolving Software Processes'',
      ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Newsletter, Oct. 1993 (Vol. 18, No. 4), p. 26-34.
      Also as EPOS TR 187, NTH, 9 Nov. 1992, 26 p., Trondheim.

      4. M. Letizia Jaccheri, Reidar Conradi:
      "Techniques for Process Model Evolution in EPOS'',
      In special issue of IEEE TSE on Software Process Model Evolution, Dec. 1993, p. 1145-1156.
      Politecnico di Torino and NTH in Trondheim, 5 May 1993, 18 p.
      Also as EPOS TR 188.

      5. Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Reidar Conradi:
      "Workspace Management: Supporting Cooperative Work'',
      Proc. International Conference for Young Computer Scientists (ICYCS-93), 15-17 July 1993, Beijing (forthcoming), 4 p.
      Also as EPOS TR 186, NTH, Trondheim, 25 April 1993.

       

      1994:

      6. Reidar Conradi et al.:
      "Object-Oriented and Cooperative Process Modelling in EPOS'',
      In PROMOTER book: Anthony Finkelstein, Jeff Kramer and Bashar A. Nuseibeh (Eds.): "Software Process Modelling and Technology'', 1994, p. 33-70.
      Advanced Software Development Series, Research Studies Press Ltd. (John Wiley), ISBN 0-86380-169-2, 362 p.

      7. Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Reidar Conradi:
      "SPELL: A Logic Programming Language for Process Modelling'', 10 p.
      Proc. of Workshop on Logic Programming in Software Engineering, 18 June 1994, Santa Margherita Ligure, Genova, Italy (held after the ICLP conference).
      Also as EPOS TR 220.

      8. Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Reidar Conradi:
      "Meta-process in a Process Support Environment'', 12 p.
      Proc. 6th Nordic Workshop on Programming Environment Research (NWPER'94), Lund, Sweden, 1-3 June 1994.
      Also as EPOS TR 221.

      9. Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Reidar Conradi:
      "The Software Meta-process: Taxonomy and Assessment'',
      NTH, 1 Aug. 1994, 9 p.
      Proc. 3rd Int'l Conference on Software Process (ICSP'3), IEEE-CS Press, 10-11 Oct. 1994 Washington.
      Also as EPOS TR 208.

      10. Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Reidar Conradi:
      "The Software Meta-process: Taxonomy and Assessment'',
      p. 167-175, Proc. 3rd Int'l Conference on Software Process (ICSP'3), IEEE-CS Press, 10-11 Oct. 1994 Washington.
      Also as EPOS TR 208.

      11. Noureddine Belkhatir, Reidar Conradi:
      "The Relationship between Software Processes and CSCW'',
      Workshop on Links between CSCW and Software Process October 22, 1994 (held before CSCW'94), Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA, 2 p. (position paper).

      1995:

      12. Reidar Conradi et al.:
      "PSEE Architecture: EPOS process models and tools'' (foils),
      Alfonso Fuggetta (Ed.): Proc. Workshop on Process-centered Software Engineering Environment Architecture, 20-23 March 1995, Politecnico di Milano, 61 p. SU-report 3/95.

      13. Reidar Conradi:
      "Session on Change and Meta-process (introduction)'',
      In Wilhelm Schäfer (Ed.): "Proc. 4th European Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'95), 3-5 Apr. 1995, Leiden, The Netherlands'', Springer Verlag LNCS 913, 1995, ISBN 3-540-59205-9, p. 240-240. SU-report 5/95.

      14. Terje Totland, Reidar Conradi:
      "A Survey and Classification of Some Research Areas Relevant to Software Process Modeling'',
      In Wilhelm Schäfer (Ed.): "Proc. 4th European Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'95), 3-5 Apr. 1995, Leiden, The Netherlands'', Springer Verlag LNCS 913, 1995, ISBN 3-540-59205-9, p. 65-69.
      Also as EPOS TR 232, NTH, Trondheim, Jan. 1995, 5 p. SU-report 6/95.

      15. Reidar Conradi, Chunnian Liu:
      "Process Modelling Languages: One or Many'',
      In Wilhelm Schäfer (Ed.): "Proc. 4th European Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'95), 3-5 Apr. 1995, Leiden, The Netherlands'', Springer Verlag LNCS 913, 1995, ISBN 3-540-59205-9, p. 98-118.
      Also as EPOS TR 231, NTH, Trondheim, Jan. 1995, 19 p. SU-report 7/95.

      16. Eirik Tryggeseth, Bjørn Gulla, Reidar Conradi:
      "Modelling Systems with Variability Using the PROTEUS Configuration Language'',
      In Jacky Estublier: ''Software Configuration Management -- ICSE SCM-4 and SCM-5 Workshops, Selected Papers'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1005, p. 216-240.
      From SCM-5 workshop 24-25 April 1995 in Seattle. SU-report 12/95.

      17. Patricia Lago, Reidar Conradi:
      "Transaction Planning to support Coordination'' (position paper),
      In Jacky Estublier: ''Software Configuration Management -- ICSE SCM-4 and SCM-5 Workshops, Selected Papers'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1005, p. 145-151. SU-report 13/95.

      18. Reidar Conradi:
      "Introduction to Session on Version Models'',
      In Jacky Estublier: ''Software Configuration Management -- ICSE SCM-4 and SCM-5 Workshops, Selected Papers'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1005, p. 80-80. SU-report 14/95.

      19. Reidar Conradi, Marianne Hagaseth, Chunnian Liu:
      "Planning Support for Cooperating Transactions in EPOS'',
      Special Issue of Information Systems, Vol. 20, No. 4 (June 1995), p. 317-336. SU-report 15/95.

      20. Jens-Otto Larsen, Bjørn P. Munch, Reidar Conradi, Patricia Lago:
      "Improving Cooperation Support in the EPOS CM System'',
      In Proc. 8th ERCIM Database Research Group Workshop on Database Issues and Infrastructure in Cooperative Information Systems, p. 135-147. 23-25 Aug. 1995, NTH, Trondheim, Norway. ERCIM report 95-W002, SINTEF. SU-report 21/95.

      1996:

      21. Reidar Conradi, Bernhard Westfechtel:
      "Configuring Versioned Software Products'',
      In Ian Sommerville (Ed.): "Software Configuration Management, ICSE'96 SCM-6 Workshop, Berlin, Germany, March 1996 -- Selected Papers'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1167, 1996, p. 88-109. SU-report 3/96.

      22. Reidar Conradi, Noureddine Belkhatir:
      "Support for Cooperative Transactions in Process-centered Software Engineering Environments'',
      Proc. Seventh Nordic Workshop on Programming Engineering Environments (NWPER'96), 29-31 May 1996, Aalborg, Denmark, 14 p. SU-report 8/96.

      23. Noureddine Belkhatir, Reidar Conradi:
      "SCOOP: A Unified Model for Cooperative Transactions in Software Engineering'', 8th Int'l Conf. on Computing and Information (ICCI'96), 19-22 June, 1996, Waterloo, Canada, 14 p. SU-report 10/96.

      24. Reidar Conradi:
      "SPIQ: A Revised Agenda for Software Process Support'',
      In Carlo Montangero (Ed.): "Software Process Technology -- 5th European Workshop (EWSPT'96), Nancy, France, October, 1996'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1149, 1996, p. 35-41. SU-report 12/96.

      25. Minh N. Nguyen, Reidar Conradi:
      "Towards a Rigorous Approach for Managing Process Evolution'',
      In Carlo Montangero (Ed.): "Software Process Technology -- 5th European Workshop (EWSPT'96), Nancy, France, October, 1996'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1149, 1996, p. 18-35. SU-report 13/96.

      1997:

      26. Minh N. Nguyen, Alf Inge Wang, Reidar Conradi:
      "Total Software Process Model Evolution in EPOS'',
      In Proc. ICSE'97, 21-23 May 1997, Boston, USA, p. 390-399. ACM/IEEE-CS Press. SU-report 8/97.

      27. Reidar Conradi, Bernhard Westfechtel:
      "Towards a Uniform Version Model for Software Configuration Management'',
      In Reidar Conradi (Ed.): "Software Configuration Management: Proceedings from SCM'7 workshop, Springer Verlag LNCS 1235''.
      18-19 May, 1997, Boston, USA, p. 1-17. SU-report 9/97.

      28. Reidar Conradi (Ed.):
      "Software Configuration Management: Proceedings from SCM'7 workshop'',
      18-19 May, 1997, Boston, USA.
      As Springer Verlag LNCS 1235, 234 p. ISBN 3-540-63014-7. SU-report 10/97.

      29. Reidar Conradi (Ed.):
      "Software Configuration Management, 7th International Workshop (SCM'7), Boston, USA, May 18-19, 1997.
      Supplementary Proceedings: additional full papers, all position papers, and address lists'',
      Issued by IDI, NTNU, Trondheim, 249 p. SU-report 11/97.

      30. Reidar Conradi and Chunnian Liu:
      "Revised PMLs and PSEEs for Industrial SPI'', 6 p.,
      In Jan Bosch and S. Mitchell (Eds.): "Object-Oriented Technology. ECOOP'97 Workshop Reader'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1357, 1997. ISBN 3-540-64039-8. From ECOOP'97 Workshop on Software Process Technology, 10-11 June 1997, Jyväskylä, Finland. SU-report 12/97.

      31. Vincenzo Ambriola, Reidar Conradi, Alfonso Fuggetta:
      "Assessing Process-centered Software Engineering Environments (OIKOS, EPOS and SPADE)'',
      ACM Trans. Software Engineering Methodology (TOSEM), July 1997, Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 282-328. SU-report 14/97.

      1998:

      32. Reidar Conradi, Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Alf Inge Wang, Chunnian Liu:
      "Planning Support to Software Process Evolution'',
      Proc. Eight International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE'98), San Francisco, USA, 18-20 June 1998, 16 p. SU-report 1/98.

      33. Reidar Conradi:
      "Practical Software Experience Databases: Use the Web (position paper)'', 3 p.
      Proc. Eight International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), San Francisco, USA, 18-20 June 1998, 16 p. SU-report 2/98.

      34. Bernhard Westfechtel and Reidar Conradi:
      "Software Configuration Management and Engineering Data Management: Differences and Similarities'',
      In Boris Magnusson (Ed.): "Software Configuration Management'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1439, p. 95-106. ECOOP'98 SCM-8 Symposium, 20-21 June 1998, Brussels. SU-report 3/98.

      35. Reidar Conradi, Bernhard Westfechtel:
      "Version Models for Software Configuration Management'',
      ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 30, Number 2, July 1998, p. 232-282. SU-report 17/97.

      36. Alf Inge Wang, Jens-Otto Larsen, Reidar Conradi, Bjørn Munch:
      "Improving Cooperation Support in the EPOS CM System'',
      In Volker Gruhn (Ed.): "Software Process Technology, 6th European Workshop, EWSPT'98, Weybridge, UK, 16-18. Sept. 1998'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1487, p. 75-91. SU-report 5/98.

      37. Reidar Conradi, Alfonso Fuggetta, Maria Letizia Jaccheri:
      "Six theses on Software Process Research'',
      In Volker Gruhn (Ed.): "Software Process Technology, 6th European Workshop, EWSPT'98, Weybridge, UK, 16-18. Sept. 1998'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1487, p. 100-104. SU-report 6/98.

      38. Chunnian Liu, Reidar Conradi:
      "Process View of CSCW'',
      Proc. Int'l Symposium of Future Software Technologies (ISFST'98), Hangzhow, P.R. China, 28-30 Oct. 1998. SU-report 11/98.

      39. M. Letizia Jaccheri, Patricia Lago, G.P. Picco:
      "Eliciting Software Process Models with the E3 Language'',
      ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, Vol. 7, No. 4, October 1988, pp. 368-410. SU-report 22/97.

      1999:

      40. Reidar Conradi and M. Letizia Jaccheri:
      "Process Modelling Languages'', p. 27-52.
      In PROMOTER2 book: Jean-Claude Derniame, Badara Ali Kaba, David Wastell (Eds.): Software Process: Principles, Methodology, and Technology, Springer Verlag LNCS 1500, 307 p. SU-report 1/99.

      41. Eirik Tryggeseth et al.:
      "Chapter 5: Architectural Modeling for Evolution'', 24 p.,
      In Ian Warren: The Renaissance of Legacy Systems: Method Support for Software System Evolution (The Method Book from the RENAISSANCE ESPRIT Project in 1996-98, project no. 22010),
      Springer Practitioner Series, 1999, 182 p. SU-report 2/99.

      42. Alf Inge Wang, Reidar Conradi, Chunnian Liu:
      "A Multi-Agent Architecture for Cooperative Software Engineering'',
      In Günter Ruhe (ed.): "Proc. Eleventh International Conference of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE'99)'', Kaiserslautern, Germany, 16-19 June 1999, p. 162-169. SU-report 3/99.

      43. Reidar Conradi, Bernhard Westfechtel:
      "SCM: Status and Future Challenges'',
      In Jacky Estublier (Ed.): "Proc. Int'l Workshop on Software Configuration Management (SCM'9)'', Springer Verlag LNCS 1675, ISBN 3-540-66484-X, Toulouse, 5-7 Sept. 1999, p. 228-231. SU-report 7/99.

      44. M. Letizia Jaccheri, Mario Baldi, Monica Divitini:
      "Evaluating the requirements for software process modeling languages and systems'',
      WORLD MULTICONFERENCE SCI/ISAS'99, International Workshop on Process Support for Distributed Team-based Software Development (PDTSD'99), Orlando, USA, 31 July -- 4 August, 1999. SU-report 10/99. requirements elicitation.

      45. Alf Inge Wang:
      "Experience paper: Using XML to implement a workflow tool'',
      Proc. IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications (SEA'99), Scottsdale, Arizona, 6-8 Oct. 1999. SU-report 13/99.

      2000:

      46. Reidar Conradi, Alf Inge Wang:
      "Beskrivelse av programvareprosesser'',
      Som kap. 10 i Tore Dybå (red.): "SPIQ metodebok i prosessforbedring'', Tanum forlag, 2000, IDI-rapport no. 2-2000, ISSN 0802-6394. SU-report 21/99.

      47. Alf Inge Wang:
      "Support for Mobile Processes in CAGIS'',
      In Reidar Conradi (Ed.): Proc. 7th European Software Process Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'7), Kaprun near Salzburg, Austria, 21-25 Feb. 2000. Springer Verlag LNCS 1780, p. 115-130. SU-report 1/2000.

      48. M. Letizia Jaccheri, Reidar Conradi, Bård H. Dyrnes:
      "Software Process Technology and Software Organisations'',
      In Reidar Conradi (Ed.): Proc. 7th European Software Process Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'7), Kaprun near Salzburg, Austria, 21-25 Feb. 2000. Springer Verlag LNCS 1780, p. 96-108. SU-report 2/2000.

      49. Reidar Conradi (Ed.):
      Proc. 7th European Software Process Workshop on Software Process Technology (EWSPT'7), Kaprun near Salzburg, Austria, 21-25 Feb. 2000, Springer Verlag LNCS 1780, Feb. 2000. SU-report 3/2000.

      50. Alfonso Fuggetta, M. Letizia Jaccheri:
      "Dynamic partitioning of complex process models'',
      Journal of Information and Software Technology, 42 (2000), p. 281-291. SU-report 5/2000.

      51. Reidar Conradi, Minh Ngoc Nguyen, Alf Inge Wang, Chunnian Liu:
      "Planning Support to Software Process Evolution'',
      Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE Journal), forthcoming May 2000. SU-report 6/99.

      52. Reidar Conradi (scribe):
      "Summary from the 7th European Software Process Workshop (EWSPT'7), Kaprun near Salzburg, 21-25 Feb. 2000'', 2 p., Forthcoming in ACM Software Engineering Notes, May 2000. SU-report 6/2000.

      53. Alf Inge Wang:
      "Experience paper: Implementing a Multi-Agent Architecture for Cooperative Software Engineering'',
      Accepted for Twelfth International Conference of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE'2000), Chicago, 6-8 July, 2000. SU-report 9/2000.

      54. Alf Inge Wang:
      "Using Software Agents to Support Evolution of Distributed Workflow Models'',
      Accepted at "International ICSC Symposium on INTERACTIVE AND COLLABORATIVE COMPUTING (ICC'2000)", at International ICSC Congress on INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS (ISA'2000), Wollongong (near Sydney), Australia, December 12-15, 2000, 7 pages. SU-report 12/2000.

    7. Publication List for database group

Below follows an excerpt for 1992-2000.

1992:

1. Mads Nygård, Stein Johannessen, Per Engeset, Jan Myrås:
"Automatic Traffic Control in Norway -- Functional and Political Issues'',
In Proc. IEEE VNIS'92: 3rd Internat. Conference on Vehicle Navigation & Information Systems, Oslo, Norway. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A92195.

2. Kåre Rumar, Mads Nygård et al. (nine authors in total):
"Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems -- Theoretical Study'',
OECD Report DSTI/RTR/RVC(92)1, Paris, France, 1992.

3. Frank J. Mammano, Mads Nygård et al. (eight authors in total):
"Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems -- Practical Evaluation'',
OECD Report DSTI/RTR/RVC(92)2, Paris, France, 1992.

1993:

4. Mads Nygård:
"Relaxed Criteria for Concurrency Control in Distributed Databases'',
In Proc. IFIP TC'93 Int'l Symposium on Network Information Processing Systems, Sofia, Bulgaria. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93160,

5. Mads Nygård:
"Sensible Variants of Non-Serializability in Replicated Distributed Databases'',
In Proc. IFIP TC6'93 Int'l Symposium on Network Information Processing Systems, Sofia, Bulgaria. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93161.

6. Mads Nygård:
"Article-Acquisition: A Scenario for Non-Serializability in a Distributed Database'',
In Proc. PARLE '93: 1993 Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe Conference, Munich, Germany. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93152.

7. Mads Nygård:
"Multi-Criteria: Degrees of Recoverability in Distributed Databases'',
In Proc. PARLE '93: 1993 Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe Conference, Munich, Germany. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93153.

8. Mads Nygård:
"BINMOD: A Model for Non-Serializability in Distributed Databases'',
BNCOD 11: 11th British National Conference on Databases, 1993, Stoke, England, Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93150.

9. Mads Nygård:
"VARCRIT: Degrees of Serializability in Replicated Distributed Databases'',
BNCOD 11: 11th British National Conference on Databases, 1993, Stoke, England, Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93151.

10. Mads Nygård, Agnar Aamodt:
"Road Transport Informatics: Conceptual Framework and Technological Components'',
In Proc. IEEE VNIS'93: 4th Int'l Conference on Vehicle Navigation & Information Systems, Ottawa, Canada. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93146.

11. Mads Nygård:
"Distributed Databases -- Limitations and Possibilities'',
Invited Talk -- IFIP TC6'93 Int'l Symposium on Network Information Processing Systems, Sofia, Bulgaria. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A93162.

12. Mads Nygård, Svein Olaf Hvasshovd et al. (seven organizations in total):
"GRACE -- Grouping for Research into Advanced CCCI for Europe'',
LOGICA CAMBRIDGE Limited -- EUCLID-VI Proposal, Cambridge, England, 1993. Partially available as SINTEF Memo SD-MN-93-01.

1994:

13. Mads Nygård:
"Tailor-Made Concurrency Control with Specialized Distributed Transactions'',
In Proc. ACIS'94: 5th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Melbourne, Australia. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A94141.

14. Mads Nygård:
"Partial Recoverability with Distributed Transactions'',
In Proc. IEEE IPCCC'94: 1994 Int'l Phoenix Conference on Computers and Communications, Phoenix, USA. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A94140.

15. Mads Nygård:
"Concurrency Control and Distributed Transactions: An Efficient Approach'',
In Proc. SCCC '94: 14th Int'l Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society, Conception, Chile. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A94144.

16. Mads Nygård:
"Recovery of Distributed Transactions: A Flexible Approach'',
In Proc. SCCC'94: 14th Int'l Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society, Conception, Chile. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A94143.

17. Mads Nygård:
"Reflections on State-of-the-Art within RTI / IVHS'',
In Proc. IEEE VNIS'94: 5th Int'l Conference on Vehicle Navigation & Information Systems, Tokyo, Japan. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A94142.

1995:

18. Mads Nygård:
"Tailor-Made Concurrency Control -- Distributed Transactions As A Case'',
In Journal AJIS: Australian Journal of Information Systems, Volume 3, Number 1 (1995), p. 53-70, Sydney, Australia.

19. Agnar Aamodt, Mads Nygård:
"Different Roles and Mutual Dependencies of Data, Information and Knowledge -- An AI Perspective on their Integration'',
In Journal DKE: Data and Knowledge Engineering, Volume 16 (1995), p. 191-222, North Holland Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

20. Bente Gaarder Andersen, Mads Nygård, Ivar Christiansen:
"RTI / ITS in Integrated Operation -- Norway's Regional Road Traffic Centres'',
In Proc. IEEE VNIS'95: 6th Int'l Conference on Vehicle Navigation & Information Systems, Seattle, USA. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A95093.

1996:

21. Vera Goebel, Thomas Plagemann, Arne-Jørgen Berre, Mads Nygård:
"OMODIS -- Object-Oriented Modeling and Database Support for Distributed Multimedia Systems'',
In Proc. 9th Norwegian Informatics Conference (NIK'96), Nov. 1996, Alta, Norway. Also available as SINTEF Report STF40 A96087.

1999:

22. Heri Ramampiaro and Monica Divitini and Sobah Abbas Petersen:
"Agent-based groupware: Challenges for cooperative transaction models'',
In Jacky Estublier (ed.): Proc. International Process Technology Workshop (IPTW'99), Grenoble, Sept. 1999, p. 18-24.

23. Heri Ramampiaro, Mads Nygård:
"Cooperative Database Systems -- A Constructive Review of Cooperative= Transaction Models'',
In Proc. DANTE'99: 1999 Int'l Symposium on Database Applications in Non-Traditional Environments, Kyoto, Japan, Nov. 1999, p. 399-408.

2000:

24. Heri Ramampiaro, Mads Nygård:
"CAGIS Trans -- A Transaction Framework to Support Cooperating Agents'',
Internal draft paper, IDI, NTNU, May 2000 (to be submitted).