Use Cases Print
Written by Administrator   
Monday, 11 June 2007 10:31

Rule Responder Use Cases

Quick Links:

Critical Succes Factors | Use Cases

The Rule Responder open source project community has chosen two ways of gathering requirements and implementing solutions towards  a general Pragmatic Agent Web:

  1. Member-submitted use cases, from which requirements are be inferred
  2. Critical Success Factor analysis methodology from which goals and requirements harvested

All requirements should have a use case or derivation of a use case from which they may be derived.

If you want to join the Rule Responder open source project, submit a use case or contribute in another way, please write an eMail to: Adrian Paschke


Critical Success Factor Analysis

In a top-down approach Critical Success Factors for an Pragmatic Agent Web are identified starting with general goals of the Rule Responder project, via factors deemed critical for the methodological and architectural design of a Pragmatic Agent Web, and ending with technical requirements for an efficient, scalabel, meaningful and useful technical implementation. The analysis is intended to be hierarchical.

List of Critical Success Factors:



Use Cases

In a bottom-up approach member-submitted use cases are collected from which requirements for a Pragmatic Agent Web and the Rule Responder project are infered and successful design and implementation solutions are proposed. The use cases address typical problems in open distributed collaborative agent communities and service supply chains which use and interchange (Semantic) Web knowledge and rules and negotiate about their semantic and pragmatic meanings. In particular, we identify and practically implement special use cases that cover the identified requirements of a Pragmatic Agent Web and show the interplay of rule based systems in an open collaborative Web based environment.

A small number of base use cases shall be gathered with as many variations as is needed. The following practical use cases (UCs) have been chosen as a starting point to investigate and implement practical solutions towards the Pragmatic Agent Web (PAW):


UC1: Request-Response Conversation (Query-Answer)

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke, Harold Boley
Date: June, 1st, 2007

The use case demonstrates request-response (query-answer) conversations between a human agent (web formula interface), an organizational agent and a personal member agent of the virtual organization. The organizational agent and the personal agent implement different rule engines (Prova and OO jDREW) and communicate asynchronously over an enterprise service bus, where the human agent (web browser) communicates synchronously with the organizational agent. A particular focus is on the representation of requests (queries) and responses (answers, failures, exceptions).

>>  use case 1

UC2: Rule Interface Definition Language (RuleML IDL)

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke as part of the Reaction RuleML 0.2 release
Date: July, 1st, 2007

The RuleML Interface Description Language (RuleML IDL), as a sublanguage of Reaction RuleML, adopts ideas of interface definition languages such as CORBA’s IDL or Web Services’ WSDL. It describes the signature of public rule functions together with their mode and type declarations. The use case demonstrates the application of RuleML IDL to query the public functions of distributed rule bases which can be accessed e.g. via Rule Responder. The distinction in public and private rule functions is important to implement Software Engineering principles such as information hidding.

>>  use case 2

UC3: Integration of External Vocabularies and Data Sources

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke
Date: June, 1st, 2007

This use case demonstrates the integration of domain-specific external vocabularies such as Semantic Web ontologies (RDFS, OWL) or object-oriented class hierarchies such as Java class hierarchies into domain-independent rules, as well as the dynamic access of external data sources such as databases (rel. SQL), Web resources (XML, RDF) and Java objects via built-in query interfaces (SQL,XPath/XPointer/XQuery, SPARQL, OWL2Prova) and procedural attachments. That is, this use case implements a connection between the rule based layer and the external syntactic and semantic Semantic Web resources such as vCard documents, FOAF profiles, RDF Bibtex libraries, iCAL calendars ...

>>  use case 3

UC4: Rule Interchange between / Upload Mobile Rule Code to Online Rule Inference Services

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke as use case for the Rule Based Service Level Agreement project
Date: June, 30th, 2007

This use case demonstrates the dynamic upload of modular rule bases to an online rule inference service (an online rule engine) which executes the mobile code and returns the results.

>> use case 4

UC5: Test-Driven Verification, Validation and Integrity Testing of Interchanged Rule Bases

Originally submiited by: Adrian Paschke as use case for the W3C Rule Interchange Format (RIF)
Date: December, 1st, 2005

Interchanged rules need to be interpreted and executed correctly in the target inference engine which might be provided as an open (Web) service by a third-party provider or a standardization body such as RuleML. Obviously, the correct execution of the interchanged rule sets depends on the semantics of both, the rule program and the rule inference engine. Test case, as used in agile Software Engineering, which are interchanged together with the rule sets can be used to test whether the program still behaves as intended in the target execution environment. This use case demonstrates test-driven verification, validation and integrity testing (V&V&I) of interchanged rule sets leading to self-validating rule bases.

>> use case 5

UC6: Reaction Rule Based Workflow Patterns


Originally submitted by: Alexander Kozlenkov as Prova Worflow Patterns in the Prova 2.0 release
Date: April, 15th, 2007

This use case implements, in terms of messaging reaction rules in Prova syntax, several well-known workflow pattern such as Join, Simple Merge, Cancel Activity, Multi-Choice, Structured Loop, Deferred Choice, Milestone as supported e.g. in BPEL, BPMN or SAP Workflow and further patterns such as the Structured Discriminator Pattern.

>> use case 6

UC7: Reaction Rule Based Complex Event Processing

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke in the Rule Based Service Level Agreement project
Date: January, 10th, 2007

This use case builds upon use case 6 and expoits messaging reaction rules for rule-based complex event processing, where low-level event messages are correlated, aggregated, analyzed and evaluated according to the defined complex event patterns in messaging reaction rules. The newly inferred complex event information then provides the basis for further decisions and reactions which are represented in terms of derivation and reaction rules.

>> use case 7


UC8: Rule Based Negotiation and Coordination Protocols


Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke in the negotiation and coordination protocols design pattern library
Date: August, 14th, 2003

This use case demonstrates the application of messaging reaction rules to implement successfull negotiation and coordination protocols such as Contract Net protocol for distributed problem solving, Monotonic Concesion protocol for bilateral negotiation or Strict Alternation protocol for dispute resolution. These negotiation and coordination protocols  can be used in semi-automated conversations between self-autonomous agents.

>> use case 8

UC9: Rule Based Negotiation of Pragmatic Meaning

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke
Date: July, 1st, 2007

This use case build upon use case 8 and specializes it towards the negotiation of semantic and pragmatic meaning of interchange message contents in order to reach a open and automated conversation between distributed rule-based agents and services.  The use of different vocabularies for pragmatic primitives such as the Agent Communication Language (ACL), KQML, Standard Deontic Logic (SDL), ... is demonstrated. This meaning negotiation is one of the cornerstones of the Pragmatic Agent Web.

>> use case 9

UC10: RuleML-200x Virtual Organization

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke, Harold Boley, Ben Craig
Date: July 1st, 2007

The RuleML-2007 Responder use case implements the RuleML-2007 organization as a virtual organization consisting of self-autonomous rule-based agents who fulfil typical conference organization and project management tasks and respond respectively react to incoming requests to the RuleML-2007 organization.

>> use case 10

UC11: Distributed Inductive Logic Programming for Mining Multi-Relation Data in Bioinformatics

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke
Date: September 1st, 2007

This use case demonstrates the distributed inductive logic programming (ILP) features of Prova, a state-of-art distributed Semantic Web and Life Science inference service system and architecture for multi-relational data mining of complex Life Science phenomena such as complex biological relationships. Parallel processing of ILP tasks is supported by a distributed service-oriented and event-driven middleware where several Prova rule engine instances are deployed on the Web as distributed inference services having access to modular data sources and distributed web-based resources.


>> use case 11

UC12: Health Care and Life Science Service-oriented eInfrastructure

Originally submitted by: Adrian Paschke
Date: Novmeber 25th, 2007

This use case develops a rule-based eScience inference infrastructure in the domain of ealth Care and Life Science, which will dynamically integrate, by the use of rules and common query languages, existing Web-based scientifiy services. Following the idea of Web Services and Grid infrastructures this use case adresses the problem of rule-based heterogenous data integration from Web sources/services and service composition.

>> use case 12


Last Updated on Friday, 17 December 2010 14:15