An Aspect-Oriented Approach for Supporting Autonomic Reconfiguration of Software Architecture

The increasing complexity of current software systems is encouraging the development of self-managed software architectures, i.e. systems capable of reconfiguring their structure at runtime to fulfil a set of goals. Several approaches have covered different aspects of their development, but some issues remain open, such as the maintainability or the scalability of self-management subsystems. Centralized approaches, like self-adaptive architectures, offer good maintenance properties but do not scale well for large systems. On the contrary, decentralized approaches, like self-organising architectures, offer good scalability but are not maintainable: reconfiguration specifications are spread and often tangled with functional specifications. In order to address these issues, this paper presents an aspect-oriented autonomic reconfiguration approach where: (1) each subsystem is provided with self-management properties so it can evolve itself and the components that it is composed of; (2) self-management concerns are isolated and encapsulated into aspects, thus improving its reuse and maintenance. Povzetek: Predstavljen je pristop s samo-preoblikovanjem programske arhitekture.

Scalable software architecture for on-line multi-camera video processing

In this paper we present a scalable software architecture for on-line multi-camera video processing, that guarantees a good trade off between computational power, scalability and flexibility. The software system is modular and its main blocks are the Processing Units (PUs), and the Central Unit. The Central Unit works as a supervisor of the running PUs and each PU manages the acquisition phase and the processing phase. Furthermore, an approach to easily parallelize the desired processing application has been presented. In this paper, as case study, we apply the proposed software architecture to a multi-camera system in order to efficiently manage multiple 2D object detection modules in a real-time scenario. System performance has been evaluated under different load conditions such as number of cameras and image sizes. The results show that the software architecture scales well with the number of camera and can easily works with different image formats respecting the real time constraints. Moreover, the parallelization approach can be used in order to speed up the processing tasks with a low level of overhead

From Analysis Model to Software Architecture: a PIM2PIM Mapping.

To our knowledge, no current software development methodology explicitly describes how to transit from the analysis model to the software architecture of the application. This paper presents a method to derive the software architecture of a system from its analysis model. To do this, we are going to use MDA. Both the analysis model and the architectural model are PIMs described with UML 2. The model type mapping designed consists of several rules (expressed using OCL and natural language) that, when applied to the analysis artifacts, generate the software architecture of the application. Specifically the rules act on elements of the UML 2 metamodel (metamodel mapping). We have developed a tool (using Smalltalk) that permits the automatic application of these rules to an analysis model defined in RoseTM to generate the application architecture expressed in the architectural style C2.

Software architecture implementation based on OpenSim

One of the objectives of the European Higher Education Area is the promotion of collaborative and informal learning through the implementation of educational practices. 3D virtual environments become an ideal space for such activities. On the other hand, the problem of financing in Spanish universities has led to the search for new ways to optimize available resources. The Technical University of Madrid requires the use of laboratories which due to their dangerousness, duration or control of the developed processes are difficult to perform in real life. For this reason, we have developed several 3D laboratories in virtual environment. The laboratories are built on open source platform OpenSim. In this paper it is exposed the use of the OpenSim platform for these new teaching experiences and the new design of the software architecture. This architecture requires the adaptation of the platform to the needs of the users and the different laboratories of our University. We will explain the structure of the implemented architecture and the process of creating and configuring it. The proposed architecture is decentralized, each laboratory is housed in different an educational center. The architecture adds several services, among others, the creation and management of users automated, communication between external services and platforms in different program languages. Therefore, we achieve improving the user experience and rising the functionalities of laboratories.

Software Design Guidelines for Usability

For years, the Human Computer Interaction (HCI) community has crafted usability guidelines that clearly define what characteristics a software system should have in order to be easy to use. However, in the Software Engineering (SE) community keep falling short of successfully incorporating these recommendations into software projects. From a SE perspective, the process of incorporating usability features into software is not always straightforward, as a large number of these features have heavy implications in the underlying software architecture. For example, successfully including an “undo” feature in an application requires the design and implementation of many complex interrelated data structures and functionalities. Our work is focused upon providing developers with a set of software design patterns to assist them in the process of designing more usable software. This would contribute to the proper inclusion of specific usability features with high impact on the software design. Preliminary validation data show that usage of the guidelines also has positive effects on development time and overall software design quality.

UML 1.4 versus UML 2.0 as Languages to Describe Software Architectures.

ML 1.4 is widely accepted as the standard for representing the various software artifacts generated by a development process. For this reason, there have been attempts to use this language to represent the software architec- ture of systems as well. Unfortunately, these attempts have ended in representa- tions (boxes and lines) already criticized by the software architecture commu- nity. Recently, OMG has published a draft that will constitute the future UML 2.0 specification. In this paper we compare the capacities of UML 1.4 and UML 2.0 to describe software architectures. In particular, we study extensions of both UML versions to describe the static view of the C3 architectural style (a simplification of the C2 style). One of the results of this study is the difficulties found when using the UML 2.0 metamodel to describe the concept of connector in a software architecture.

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web

OntoTag - A Linguistic and Ontological Annotation Model Suitable for the Semantic Web 1. INTRODUCTION. LINGUISTIC TOOLS AND ANNOTATIONS: THEIR LIGHTS AND SHADOWS Computational Linguistics is already a consolidated research area. It builds upon the results of other two major ones, namely Linguistics and Computer Science and Engineering, and it aims at developing computational models of human language (or natural language, as it is termed in this area). Possibly, its most well-known applications are the different tools developed so far for processing human language, such as machine translation systems and speech recognizers or dictation programs. These tools for processing human language are commonly referred to as linguistic tools. Apart from the examples mentioned above, there are also other types of linguistic tools that perhaps are not so well-known, but on which most of the other applications of Computational Linguistics are built. These other types of linguistic tools comprise POS taggers, natural language parsers and semantic taggers, amongst others. All of them can be termed linguistic annotation tools. Linguistic annotation tools are important assets. In fact, POS and semantic taggers (and, to a lesser extent, also natural language parsers) have become critical resources for the computer applications that process natural language. Hence, any computer application that has to analyse a text automatically and ‘intelligently’ will include at least a module for POS tagging. The more an application needs to ‘understand’ the meaning of the text it processes, the more linguistic tools and/or modules it will incorporate and integrate. However, linguistic annotation tools have still some limitations, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Normally, they perform annotations only at a certain linguistic level (that is, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, etc.). 2. They usually introduce a certain rate of errors and ambiguities when tagging. This error rate ranges from 10 percent up to 50 percent of the units annotated for unrestricted, general texts. 3. Their annotations are most frequently formulated in terms of an annotation schema designed and implemented ad hoc. A priori, it seems that the interoperation and the integration of several linguistic tools into an appropriate software architecture could most likely solve the limitations stated in (1). Besides, integrating several linguistic annotation tools and making them interoperate could also minimise the limitation stated in (2). Nevertheless, in the latter case, all these tools should produce annotations for a common level, which would have to be combined in order to correct their corresponding errors and inaccuracies. Yet, the limitation stated in (3) prevents both types of integration and interoperation from being easily achieved. In addition, most high-level annotation tools rely on other lower-level annotation tools and their outputs to generate their own ones. For example, sense-tagging tools (operating at the semantic level) often use POS taggers (operating at a lower level, i.e., the morphosyntactic) to identify the grammatical category of the word or lexical unit they are annotating. Accordingly, if a faulty or inaccurate low-level annotation tool is to be used by other higher-level one in its process, the errors and inaccuracies of the former should be minimised in advance. Otherwise, these errors and inaccuracies would be transferred to (and even magnified in) the annotations of the high-level annotation tool. Therefore, it would be quite useful to find a way to (i) correct or, at least, reduce the errors and the inaccuracies of lower-level linguistic tools; (ii) unify the annotation schemas of different linguistic annotation tools or, more generally speaking, make these tools (as well as their annotations) interoperate. Clearly, solving (i) and (ii) should ease the automatic annotation of web pages by means of linguistic tools, and their transformation into Semantic Web pages (Berners-Lee, Hendler and Lassila, 2001). Yet, as stated above, (ii) is a type of interoperability problem. There again, ontologies (Gruber, 1993; Borst, 1997) have been successfully applied thus far to solve several interoperability problems. Hence, ontologies should help solve also the problems and limitations of linguistic annotation tools aforementioned. Thus, to summarise, the main aim of the present work was to combine somehow these separated approaches, mechanisms and tools for annotation from Linguistics and Ontological Engineering (and the Semantic Web) in a sort of hybrid (linguistic and ontological) annotation model, suitable for both areas. This hybrid (semantic) annotation model should (a) benefit from the advances, models, techniques, mechanisms and tools of these two areas; (b) minimise (and even solve, when possible) some of the problems found in each of them; and (c) be suitable for the Semantic Web. The concrete goals that helped attain this aim are presented in the following section. 2. GOALS OF THE PRESENT WORK As mentioned above, the main goal of this work was to specify a hybrid (that is, linguistically-motivated and ontology-based) model of annotation suitable for the Semantic Web (i.e. it had to produce a semantic annotation of web page contents). This entailed that the tags included in the annotations of the model had to (1) represent linguistic concepts (or linguistic categories, as they are termed in ISO/DCR (2008)), in order for this model to be linguistically-motivated; (2) be ontological terms (i.e., use an ontological vocabulary), in order for the model to be ontology-based; and (3) be structured (linked) as a collection of ontology-based triples, as in the usual Semantic Web languages (namely RDF(S) and OWL), in order for the model to be considered suitable for the Semantic Web. Besides, to be useful for the Semantic Web, this model should provide a way to automate the annotation of web pages. As for the present work, this requirement involved reusing the linguistic annotation tools purchased by the OEG research group (http://www.oeg-upm.net), but solving beforehand (or, at least, minimising) some of their limitations. Therefore, this model had to minimise these limitations by means of the integration of several linguistic annotation tools into a common architecture. Since this integration required the interoperation of tools and their annotations, ontologies were proposed as the main technological component to make them effectively interoperate. From the very beginning, it seemed that the formalisation of the elements and the knowledge underlying linguistic annotations within an appropriate set of ontologies would be a great step forward towards the formulation of such a model (henceforth referred to as OntoTag). Obviously, first, to combine the results of the linguistic annotation tools that operated at the same level, their annotation schemas had to be unified (or, preferably, standardised) in advance. This entailed the unification (id. standardisation) of their tags (both their representation and their meaning), and their format or syntax. Second, to merge the results of the linguistic annotation tools operating at different levels, their respective annotation schemas had to be (a) made interoperable and (b) integrated. And third, in order for the resulting annotations to suit the Semantic Web, they had to be specified by means of an ontology-based vocabulary, and structured by means of ontology-based triples, as hinted above. Therefore, a new annotation scheme had to be devised, based both on ontologies and on this type of triples, which allowed for the combination and the integration of the annotations of any set of linguistic annotation tools. This annotation scheme was considered a fundamental part of the model proposed here, and its development was, accordingly, another major objective of the present work. All these goals, aims and objectives could be re-stated more clearly as follows: Goal 1: Development of a set of ontologies for the formalisation of the linguistic knowledge relating linguistic annotation. Sub-goal 1.1: Ontological formalisation of the EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) de facto standards for morphosyntactic and syntactic annotation, in a way that helps respect the triple structure recommended for annotations in these works (which is isomorphic to the triple structures used in the context of the Semantic Web). Sub-goal 1.2: Incorporation into this preliminary ontological formalisation of other existing standards and standard proposals relating the levels mentioned above, such as those currently under development within ISO/TC 37 (the ISO Technical Committee dealing with Terminology, which deals also with linguistic resources and annotations). Sub-goal 1.3: Generalisation and extension of the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and ISO/TC 37 to the semantic level, for which no ISO/TC 37 standards have been developed yet. Sub-goal 1.4: Ontological formalisation of the generalisations and/or extensions obtained in the previous sub-goal as generalisations and/or extensions of the corresponding ontology (or ontologies). Sub-goal 1.5: Ontological formalisation of the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the previously developed ontology (or ontologies). Goal 2: Development of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, a standard-based abstract scheme for the hybrid (linguistically-motivated and ontological-based) annotation of texts. Sub-goal 2.1: Development of the standard-based morphosyntactic annotation level of OntoTag’s scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996a) and also the recommendations included in the ISO/MAF (2008) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.2: Development of the standard-based syntactic annotation level of the hybrid abstract scheme. This level should include, and possibly extend, the recommendations of EAGLES (1996b) and the ISO/SynAF (2010) standard draft. Sub-goal 2.3: Development of the standard-based semantic annotation level of OntoTag’s (abstract) scheme. Sub-goal 2.4: Development of the mechanisms for a convenient integration of the three annotation levels already mentioned. These mechanisms should take into account the recommendations included in the ISO/LAF (2009) standard draft. Goal 3: Design of OntoTag’s (abstract) annotation architecture, an abstract architecture for the hybrid (semantic) annotation of texts (i) that facilitates the integration and interoperation of different linguistic annotation tools, and (ii) whose results comply with OntoTag’s annotation scheme. Sub-goal 3.1: Specification of the decanting processes that allow for the classification and separation, according to their corresponding levels, of the results of the linguistic tools annotating at several different levels. Sub-goal 3.2: Specification of the standardisation processes that allow (a) complying with the standardisation requirements of OntoTag’s annotation scheme, as well as (b) combining the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.3: Specification of the merging processes that allow for the combination of the output annotations and the interoperation of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation. Sub-goal 3.4: Specification of the merge processes that allow for the integration of the results and the interoperation of those tools performing their annotations at different levels. Goal 4: Generation of OntoTagger’s schema, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract scheme for a concrete set of linguistic annotations. These linguistic annotations result from the tools and the resources available in the research group, namely • Bitext’s DataLexica (http://www.bitext.com/EN/datalexica.asp), • LACELL’s (POS) tagger (http://www.um.es/grupos/grupo-lacell/quees.php), • Connexor’s FDG (http://www.connexor.eu/technology/machinese/glossary/fdg/), and • EuroWordNet (Vossen et al., 1998). This schema should help evaluate OntoTag’s underlying hypotheses, stated below. Consequently, it should implement, at least, those levels of the abstract scheme dealing with the annotations of the set of tools considered in this implementation. This includes the morphosyntactic, the syntactic and the semantic levels. Goal 5: Implementation of OntoTagger’s configuration, a concrete instance of OntoTag’s abstract architecture for this set of linguistic tools and annotations. This configuration (1) had to use the schema generated in the previous goal; and (2) should help support or refute the hypotheses of this work as well (see the next section). Sub-goal 5.1: Implementation of the decanting processes that facilitate the classification and separation of the results of those linguistic resources that provide annotations at several different levels (on the one hand, LACELL’s tagger operates at the morphosyntactic level and, minimally, also at the semantic level; on the other hand, FDG operates at the morphosyntactic and the syntactic levels and, minimally, at the semantic level as well). Sub-goal 5.2: Implementation of the standardisation processes that allow (i) specifying the results of those linguistic tools that share some level of annotation according to the requirements of OntoTagger’s schema, as well as (ii) combining these shared level results. In particular, all the tools selected perform morphosyntactic annotations and they had to be conveniently combined by means of these processes. Sub-goal 5.3: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the combination (and possibly the improvement) of the annotations and the interoperation of the tools that share some level of annotation (in particular, those relating the morphosyntactic level, as in the previous sub-goal). Sub-goal 5.4: Implementation of the merging processes that allow for the integration of the different standardised and combined annotations aforementioned, relating all the levels considered. Sub-goal 5.5: Improvement of the semantic level of this configuration by adding a named entity recognition, (sub-)classification and annotation subsystem, which also uses the named entities annotated to populate a domain ontology, in order to provide a concrete application of the present work in the two areas involved (the Semantic Web and Corpus Linguistics). 3. MAIN RESULTS: ASSESSMENT OF ONTOTAG’S UNDERLYING HYPOTHESES The model developed in the present thesis tries to shed some light on (i) whether linguistic annotation tools can effectively interoperate; (ii) whether their results can be combined and integrated; and, if they can, (iii) how they can, respectively, interoperate and be combined and integrated. Accordingly, several hypotheses had to be supported (or rejected) by the development of the OntoTag model and OntoTagger (its implementation). The hypotheses underlying OntoTag are surveyed below. Only one of the hypotheses (H.6) was rejected; the other five could be confirmed. H.1 The annotations of different levels (or layers) can be integrated into a sort of overall, comprehensive, multilayer and multilevel annotation, so that their elements can complement and refer to each other. • CONFIRMED by the development of: o OntoTag’s annotation scheme, o OntoTag’s annotation architecture, o OntoTagger’s (XML, RDF, OWL) annotation schemas, o OntoTagger’s configuration. H.2 Tool-dependent annotations can be mapped onto a sort of tool-independent annotations and, thus, can be standardised. • CONFIRMED by means of the standardisation phase incorporated into OntoTag and OntoTagger for the annotations yielded by the tools. H.3 Standardisation should ease: H.3.1: The interoperation of linguistic tools. H.3.2: The comparison, combination (at the same level and layer) and integration (at different levels or layers) of annotations. • H.3 was CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s ontology-based configuration: o Interoperation, comparison, combination and integration of the annotations of three different linguistic tools (Connexor’s FDG, Bitext’s DataLexica and LACELL’s tagger); o Integration of EuroWordNet-based, domain-ontology-based and named entity annotations at the semantic level. o Integration of morphosyntactic, syntactic and semantic annotations. H.4 Ontologies and Semantic Web technologies (can) play a crucial role in the standardisation of linguistic annotations, by providing consensual vocabularies and standardised formats for annotation (e.g., RDF triples). • CONFIRMED by means of the development of OntoTagger’s RDF-triple-based annotation schemas. H.5 The rate of errors introduced by a linguistic tool at a given level, when annotating, can be reduced automatically by contrasting and combining its results with the ones coming from other tools, operating at the same level. However, these other tools might be built following a different technological (stochastic vs. rule-based, for example) or theoretical (dependency vs. HPS-grammar-based, for instance) approach. • CONFIRMED by the results yielded by the evaluation of OntoTagger. H.6 Each linguistic level can be managed and annotated independently. • REJECTED: OntoTagger’s experiments and the dependencies observed among the morphosyntactic annotations, and between them and the syntactic annotations. In fact, Hypothesis H.6 was already rejected when OntoTag’s ontologies were developed. We observed then that several linguistic units stand on an interface between levels, belonging thereby to both of them (such as morphosyntactic units, which belong to both the morphological level and the syntactic level). Therefore, the annotations of these levels overlap and cannot be handled independently when merged into a unique multileveled annotation. 4. OTHER MAIN RESULTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS First, interoperability is a hot topic for both the linguistic annotation community and the whole Computer Science field. The specification (and implementation) of OntoTag’s architecture for the combination and integration of linguistic (annotation) tools and annotations by means of ontologies shows a way to make these different linguistic annotation tools and annotations interoperate in practice. Second, as mentioned above, the elements involved in linguistic annotation were formalised in a set (or network) of ontologies (OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies). • On the one hand, OntoTag’s network of ontologies consists of − The Linguistic Unit Ontology (LUO), which includes a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of linguistic elements (i.e., units) identifiable in a written text; − The Linguistic Attribute Ontology (LAO), which includes also a mostly hierarchical formalisation of the different types of features that characterise the linguistic units included in the LUO; − The Linguistic Value Ontology (LVO), which includes the corresponding formalisation of the different values that the attributes in the LAO can take; − The OIO (OntoTag’s Integration Ontology), which  Includes the knowledge required to link, combine and unite the knowledge represented in the LUO, the LAO and the LVO;  Can be viewed as a knowledge representation ontology that describes the most elementary vocabulary used in the area of annotation. • On the other hand, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the knowledge included in the different standards and recommendations for linguistic annotation released so far, such as those developed within the EAGLES and the SIMPLE European projects or by the ISO/TC 37 committee: − As far as morphosyntactic annotations are concerned, OntoTag’s ontologies formalise the terms in the EAGLES (1996a) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Morphosyntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/MAF, 2008) standard; − As for syntactic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies incorporate the terms in the EAGLES (1996b) recommendations and their corresponding terms within the ISO Syntactic Annotation Framework (ISO/SynAF, 2010) standard draft; − Regarding semantic annotations, OntoTag’s ontologies generalise and extend the recommendations in EAGLES (1996a; 1996b) and, since no stable standards or standard drafts have been released for semantic annotation by ISO/TC 37 yet, they incorporate the terms in SIMPLE (2000) instead; − The terms coming from all these recommendations and standards were supplemented by those within the ISO Data Category Registry (ISO/DCR, 2008) and also of the ISO Linguistic Annotation Framework (ISO/LAF, 2009) standard draft when developing OntoTag’s ontologies. Third, we showed that the combination of the results of tools annotating at the same level can yield better results (both in precision and in recall) than each tool separately. In particular, 1. OntoTagger clearly outperformed two of the tools integrated into its configuration, namely DataLexica and FDG in all the combination sub-phases in which they overlapped (i.e. POS tagging, lemma annotation and morphological feature annotation). As far as the remaining tool is concerned, i.e. LACELL’s tagger, it was also outperformed by OntoTagger in POS tagging and lemma annotation, and it did not behave better than OntoTagger in the morphological feature annotation layer. 2. As an immediate result, this implies that a) This type of combination architecture configurations can be applied in order to improve significantly the accuracy of linguistic annotations; and b) Concerning the morphosyntactic level, this could be regarded as a way of constructing more robust and more accurate POS tagging systems. Fourth, Semantic Web annotations are usually performed by humans or else by machine learning systems. Both of them leave much to be desired: the former, with respect to their annotation rate; the latter, with respect to their (average) precision and recall. In this work, we showed how linguistic tools can be wrapped in order to annotate automatically Semantic Web pages using ontologies. This entails their fast, robust and accurate semantic annotation. As a way of example, as mentioned in Sub-goal 5.5, we developed a particular OntoTagger module for the recognition, classification and labelling of named entities, according to the MUC and ACE tagsets (Chinchor, 1997; Doddington et al., 2004). These tagsets were further specified by means of a domain ontology, namely the Cinema Named Entities Ontology (CNEO). This module was applied to the automatic annotation of ten different web pages containing cinema reviews (that is, around 5000 words). In addition, the named entities annotated with this module were also labelled as instances (or individuals) of the classes included in the CNEO and, then, were used to populate this domain ontology. • The statistical results obtained from the evaluation of this particular module of OntoTagger can be summarised as follows. On the one hand, as far as recall (R) is concerned, (R.1) the lowest value was 76,40% (for file 7); (R.2) the highest value was 97, 50% (for file 3); and (R.3) the average value was 88,73%. On the other hand, as far as the precision rate (P) is concerned, (P.1) its minimum was 93,75% (for file 4); (R.2) its maximum was 100% (for files 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10); and (R.3) its average value was 98,99%. • These results, which apply to the tasks of named entity annotation and ontology population, are extraordinary good for both of them. They can be explained on the basis of the high accuracy of the annotations provided by OntoTagger at the lower levels (mainly at the morphosyntactic level). However, they should be conveniently qualified, since they might be too domain- and/or language-dependent. It should be further experimented how our approach works in a different domain or a different language, such as French, English, or German. • In any case, the results of this application of Human Language Technologies to Ontology Population (and, accordingly, to Ontological Engineering) seem very promising and encouraging in order for these two areas to collaborate and complement each other in the area of semantic annotation. Fifth, as shown in the State of the Art of this work, there are different approaches and models for the semantic annotation of texts, but all of them focus on a particular view of the semantic level. Clearly, all these approaches and models should be integrated in order to bear a coherent and joint semantic annotation level. OntoTag shows how (i) these semantic annotation layers could be integrated together; and (ii) they could be integrated with the annotations associated to other annotation levels. Sixth, we identified some recommendations, best practices and lessons learned for annotation standardisation, interoperation and merge. They show how standardisation (via ontologies, in this case) enables the combination, integration and interoperation of different linguistic tools and their annotations into a multilayered (or multileveled) linguistic annotation, which is one of the hot topics in the area of Linguistic Annotation. And last but not least, OntoTag’s annotation scheme and OntoTagger’s annotation schemas show a way to formalise and annotate coherently and uniformly the different units and features associated to the different levels and layers of linguistic annotation. This is a great scientific step ahead towards the global standardisation of this area, which is the aim of ISO/TC 37 (in particular, Subcommittee 4, dealing with the standardisation of linguistic annotations and resources).

Programmed design of ship forms

This paper describes a new category of CAD applications devoted to the definition and parameterization of hull forms, called programmed design. Programmed design relies on two prerequisites. The first one is a product model with a variety of types large enough to face the modeling of any type of ship. The second one is a design language dedicated to create the product model. The main purpose of the language is to publish the modeling algorithms of the application in the designer knowledge domain to let the designer create parametric model scripts. The programmed design is an evolution of the parametric design but it is not just parametric design. It is a tool to create parametric design tools. It provides a methodology to extract the design knowledge by abstracting a design experience in order to store and reuse it. Programmed design is related with the organizational and architectural aspects of the CAD applications but not with the development of modeling algorithms. It is built on top and relies on existing algorithms provided by a comprehensive product model. Programmed design can be useful to develop new applications, to support the evolution of existing applications or even to integrate different types of application in a single one. A three-level software architecture is proposed to make the implementation of the programmed design easier. These levels are the conceptual level based on the design language, the mathematical level based on the geometric formulation of the product model and the visual level based on the polyhedral representation of the model as required by the graphic card. Finally, some scenarios of the use of programmed design are discussed. For instance, the development of specialized parametric hull form generators for a ship type or a family of ships or the creation of palettes of hull form components to be used as parametric design patterns. Also two new processes of reverse engineering which can considerably improve the application have been detected: the creation of the mathematical level from the visual level and the creation of the conceptual level from the mathematical level. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction

A UGV Navigation System for Large Outdoor Environments Including Virtual Obstacles for No-Go Zones

This work presents a navigation system for UGVs in large outdoor environments; virtual obstacles are added to the system in order to avoid zones that may present risks to the UGV or the elements in its surroundings. The platform, software architecture and the modifications necessary to handle the virtual obstacles are explained in detail. Several tests have been performed and their results show that the system proposed is capable of performing safe navigation in complex environments.

A platform for real-time control education with LEGO MINDSTORMS.

A set of software development tools for building real-time control systems on a simple robotics platform is described in the paper. The tools are being used in a real-time systems course as a basis for student projects. The development platform is a low-cost PC running GNU/Linux, and the target system is LEGO MINDSTORMS NXT, thus keeping the cost of the laboratory low. Real-time control software is developed using a mixed paradigm. Functional code for control algorithms is automatically generated in C from Simulink models. This code is then integrated into a concurrent, real-time software architecture based on a set of components written in Ada. This approach enables the students to take advantage of the high-level, model-oriented features that Simulink oers for designing control algorithms, and the comprehensive support for concurrency and real-time constructs provided by Ada.

New control architecturebased on PXI for a 3-finger haptic device applied to virtual manipulation

To perform advanced manipulation of remote environments such as grasping, more than one finger is required implying higher requirements for the control architecture. This paper presents the design and control of a modular 3-finger haptic device that can be used to interact with virtual scenarios or to teleoperate dexterous remote hands. In a modular haptic device, each module allows the interaction with a scenario by using a single finger; hence, multi-finger interaction can be achieved by adding more modules. Control requirements for a multifinger haptic device are analyzed and new hardware/software architecture for these kinds of devices is proposed. The software architecture described in this paper is distributed and the different modules communicate to allow the remote manipulation. Moreover, an application in which this haptic device is used to interact with a virtual scenario is shown.

On the automatic integration of hardware accelerators into FPGA-based embedded systems

This paper proposes an automatic framework for the seamless integration of hardware accelerators, starting from an OpenMP-based application and an XML file describing the HW/SW partitioning. It extends a fully software architecture by generating and integrating the cores, along with the proper interfaces, and the code for scheduling and synchronization. Experimental results show that it is possible to validate different solutions only by varying the input code.

Diseño de Solución Interoperable para Aplicaciones M2M

La mejora de las tecnologías ha tenido un importante impacto en Internet, así como en el número de usuarios. Este crecimiento sigue en aumento y se estima que en 2020 se alcancen 50 billones de dispositivos conectados a Internet, este impulso es en parte gracias a la interconexión de las “máquinas” entre ellas y con Internet, el concepto denominado M2M. Esta conexión entre dispositivos ofrece la posibilidad de mejorar los servicios dados a los usuarios y crear nuevos. Existen importantes alicientes en la evolución de M2M, sobre todo guiada por la gran cantidad de posibilidades ofrecidas y los beneficios que conllevan, sin embargo la falta de estandarización y horizontalidad se presentan como un problema para el crecimiento e implantación de M2M debido a la gran variedad de “maquinas” conectadas. El objetivo de este Proyecto Fin de Carrera es diseñar una plataforma que sea capaz de abarcar las funcionalidades que den soporte a las distintas necesidades de varias aplicaciones M2M, consiguiendo una arquitectura software horizontal que reutilice al máximo las funcionalidades comunes entre las aplicaciones cubiertas. De esta manera se presenta una solución a la falta de horizontalidad en las plataformas M2M. Este Proyecto Fin de Carrera está dividido en varias partes. Se comenzará con una introducción que sitúa en el contexto tecnológico de M2M en forma de estudio de estado del arte, abarcando los principales temas y conceptos relacionados con Machine-to-Machine. Posteriormente se realiza una propuesta de una arquitectura software M2M que permite focalizar los esfuerzos de la misma en un concentrado grupo de sectores y aplicaciones. A continuación se estudian las necesidades de los sectores y aplicaciones seleccionadas y se desarrollan las funcionalidades que incluye la plataforma, de esta manera se alcanza un modelo de arquitectura horizontal que es capaz de cubrir varios sectores. Se estudian los distintos resultados obtenidos en el desarrollo de la plataforma,validando el modelo obtenido con los resultados esperados. Finalmente se enunciarán los próximos pasos a seguir para la implementación de la plataforma. ABSTRACT. The development of technology has had an important impact on Internet, as well as on the number of users. This growth is increasing and it is estimated to reach 50 billion remotely connected devices by 2020, this momentum is partially due to interconnection between "machines" and their connection with internet, this concept is called M2M. The connection between devices gives the possibility to improve the services offered to users and to create new services. There are important incentives in the M2M evolution, mainly driven by the big amount of benefits offered; however the lack of standardization and horizontalization is a problem for the M2M growth and deployment due to the big variety of connected "machines". The aim of this Degree Project is to design a platform that will be capable of including the functionalities that will give support to the different needs of several M2M applications, achieving a horizontal software architecture that reuses the common functionalities between the applications supported. This architecture will be presented as a solution to the lack of horizontalization in M2M. This Degree Project is divided in several parts. It starts with an introduction that will place the reader in state of the art of the M2M technology context, covering the main themes and related concepts. After this introduction, a proposal of a horizontal M2M software architecture will be presented, that will allow to focus the efforts on a group of selected sectors and applications. Then, the needs of sectors and applications will be studied, and the main functionalities will be developed, in this way a model for a horizontal architecture will be reached, that will be able to cover several sectors. The resulting platform will be studied, in order to validate the model obtained with the expected results. Finally, the next steps to implement the platform are described.

Open Technologies for prototyping the Internet of Things

The worldwide "hyper-connection" of any object around us is the challenge that promises to cover the paradigm of the Internet of Things. If the Internet has colonized the daily life of more than 2000 million1 people around the globe, the Internet of Things faces of connecting more than 100000 million2 "things" by 2020. The underlying Internet of Things’ technologies are the cornerstone that promises to solve interrelated global problems such as exponential population growth, energy management in cities, and environmental sustainability in the average and long term. On the one hand, this Project has the goal of knowledge acquisition about prototyping technologies available in the market for the Internet of Things. On the other hand, the Project focuses on the development of a system for devices management within a Wireless Sensor and Actuator Network to offer some services accessible from the Internet. To accomplish the objectives, the Project will begin with a detailed analysis of various “open source” hardware platforms to encourage creative development of applications, and automatically extract information from the environment around them for transmission to external systems. In addition, web platforms that enable mass storage with the philosophy of the Internet of Things will be studied. The project will culminate in the proposal and specification of a service-oriented software architecture for embedded systems that allows communication between devices on the network, and the data transmission to external systems. Furthermore, it abstracts the complexities of hardware to application developers. RESUMEN. La “hiper-conexión” a nivel mundial de cualquier objeto que nos rodea es el desafío al que promete dar cobertura el paradigma de la Internet de las Cosas. Si la Internet ha colonizado el día a día de más de 2000 millones1 de personas en todo el planeta, la Internet de las Cosas plantea el reto de conectar a más de 100000 millones2 de “cosas” para el año 2020. Las tecnologías subyacentes de la Internet de las Cosas son la piedra angular que prometen dar solución a problemas globales interrelacionados como el crecimiento exponencial de la población, la gestión de la energía en las ciudades o la sostenibilidad del medioambiente a largo plazo. Este Proyecto Fin de Carrera tiene como principales objetivos por un lado, la adquisición de conocimientos acerca de las tecnologías para prototipos disponibles en el mercado para la Internet de las Cosas, y por otro lado el desarrollo de un sistema para la gestión de dispositivos de una red inalámbrica de sensores que ofrezcan unos servicios accesibles desde la Internet. Con el fin de abordar los objetivos marcados, el proyecto comenzará con un análisis detallado de varias plataformas hardware de tipo “open source” que estimulen el desarrollo creativo de aplicaciones y que permitan extraer de forma automática información del medio que les rodea para transmitirlo a sistemas externos para su posterior procesamiento. Por otro lado, se estudiarán plataformas web identificadas con la filosofía de la Internet de las Cosas que permitan el almacenamiento masivo de datos que diferentes plataformas hardware transfieren a través de la Internet. El Proyecto culminará con la propuesta y la especificación una arquitectura software orientada a servicios para sistemas empotrados que permita la comunicación entre los dispositivos de la red y la transmisión de datos a sistemas externos, así como facilitar el desarrollo de aplicaciones a los programadores mediante la abstracción de la complejidad del hardware.

Change-Impact driven Agile Architecting.

Software architecture is a key factor to scale up Agile Software Development ASD in large softwareintensive systems. Currently, software architectures are more often approached through mechanisms that enable to incrementally design and evolve software architectures aka. agile architecting. Agile architecting should be a light-weight decision-making process, which could be achieved by providing knowledge to assist agile architects in reasoning about changes. This paper presents the novel solution of using change-impact knowledge as the main driver for agile architecting. The solution consists of a Change Impact Analysis technique and a set of models to assist agile architects in the change -decision-making- process by retrieving the change-impact architectural knowledge resulting from adding or changing features iteration after iteration. To validate our approach, we have put our solution into practice by running a project of a metering management system in electric power networks in an i-smart software factory.