Cost-based BDI plan selection for change propagation

Software maintenance is responsible for as much as two thirds of the cost of any software, and is consequently an important research area. In this paper we focus on the change propagation problem: given a primary change that is made in order to meet a new or changed requirement, what additional, secondary, changes are needed? We build on previous work that has proposed to use a BDI (belief-desire-intention) agent framework to propagate changes by fixing violations of consistency constraints. One question that needs to be answered as part of this framework is how to select between different applicable (repair) plan instances to fix a given constraint violation? We address this issue by defining a suitable notion of repair plan cost that incorporates both conflict between plans, and synergies between plans. We then develop an algorithm, based on the notion of cost, that finds cheapest options and proposes them to the user.

[1]  Michael Winikoff,et al.  Tool support for agent development using the Prometheus methodology , 2005, Fifth International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC'05).

[2]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  Changing the paradigm of software engineering , 2006, CACM.

[3]  Alexander Egyed,et al.  Instant consistency checking for the UML , 2006, ICSE.

[4]  Wolfgang Emmerich,et al.  Consistency management with repair actions , 2003, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[5]  Lionel C. Briand,et al.  Impact analysis and change management of UML models , 2003, International Conference on Software Maintenance, 2003. ICSM 2003. Proceedings..

[6]  Michael Winikoff,et al.  Developing intelligent agent systems - a practical guide , 2004, Wiley series in agent technology.

[7]  Michael Winikoff,et al.  Generation of Repair Plans for Change Propagation , 2007, AOSE.

[8]  Hans van Vliet,et al.  Software engineering - principles and practice , 1993 .

[9]  Dana S. Nau,et al.  SHOP2: An HTN Planning System , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[10]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Top-down search for coordinating the hierarchical plans of multiple agents , 1999, AGENTS '99.

[11]  Martha E. Pollack,et al.  Evaluating new options in the context of existing plans , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[12]  Lin Padgham,et al.  An Open Meteorological Alerting System: Issues and Solutions , 2004, ACSC.

[13]  Jean-Louis Sourrouille,et al.  Constraint checking in UML modeling , 2002, SEKE '02.

[14]  A. S. Roa,et al.  AgentSpeak(L): BDI agents speak out in a logical computable language , 1996 .

[15]  Alexander Egyed,et al.  Fixing Inconsistencies in UML Design Models , 2007, 29th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'07).

[16]  Aditya K. Ghose,et al.  CASO: a framework for dealing with objectives in a constraint-based extension to AgentSpeak(L) , 2006, ACSC.

[17]  Michael Winikoff,et al.  An agent-oriented approach to change propagation in software evolution , 2006, Australian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC'06).

[18]  Michael Winikoff,et al.  Avoiding Resource Conflicts in Intelligent Agents , 2002, ECAI.

[19]  A. Baruzzo,et al.  Checking UML Model Consistency , 2006 .

[20]  Václav Rajlich,et al.  A model for change propagation based on graph rewriting , 1997, 1997 Proceedings International Conference on Software Maintenance.