Análise energética, otimização e modernização dos sistemas de um grande edifício de serviços na ótica da melhoria da eficiência energética

Trabalho Final de Mestrado para obtenção do grau de Mestre em Engenharia Mecânica Perfil Energia, Refrigeração e Climatização

Conceptual analogy for modelling entrapped air action in hydraulic systems

Hydraulic systems are dynamically susceptible in the presence of entrapped air pockets, leading to amplified transient reactions. In order to model the dynamic action of an entrapped air pocket in a confined system, a heuristic mathematical formulation based on a conceptual analogy to a mechanical spring-damper system is proposed. The formulation is based on the polytropic relationship of an ideal gas and includes an additional term, which encompasses the combined damping effects associated with the thermodynamic deviations from the theoretical transformation, as well as those arising from the transient vorticity developed in both fluid domains (air and water). These effects represent the key factors that account for flow energy dissipation and pressure damping. Model validation was completed via numerical simulation of experimental measurements.

Reason Maintenance Systems: Tools for Foundations-based Belief Revision

Dynamic and distributed environments are hard to model since they suffer from unexpected changes, incomplete knowledge, and conflicting perspectives and, thus, call for appropriate knowledge representation and reasoning (KRR) systems. Such KRR systems must handle sets of dynamic beliefs, be sensitive to communicated and perceived changes in the environment and, consequently, may have to drop current beliefs in face of new findings or disregard any new data that conflicts with stronger convictions held by the system. Not only do they need to represent and reason with beliefs, but also they must perform belief revision to maintain the overall consistency of the knowledge base. One way of developing such systems is to use reason maintenance systems (RMS). In this paper we provide an overview of the most representative types of RMS, which are also known as truth maintenance systems (TMS), which are computational instances of the foundations-based theory of belief revision. An RMS module works together with a problem solver. The latter feeds the RMS with assumptions (core beliefs) and conclusions (derived beliefs), which are accompanied by their respective foundations. The role of the RMS module is to store the beliefs, associate with each belief (core or derived belief) the corresponding set of supporting foundations and maintain the consistency of the overall reasoning by keeping, for each represented belief, the current supporting justifications. Two major approaches are used to reason maintenance: single-and multiple-context reasoning systems. Although in the single-context systems, each belief is associated to the beliefs that directly generated it—the justification-based TMS (JTMS) or the logic-based TMS (LTMS), in the multiple context counterparts, each belief is associated with the minimal set of assumptions from which it can be inferred—the assumption-based TMS (ATMS) or the multiple belief reasoner (MBR).

Argumentation as Distributed Belief Revision: Conflict Resolution in Decentralised Multi-agent Systems

Decentralised co-operative multi-agent systems are computational systems where conflicts are frequent due to the nature of the represented knowledge. Negotiation methodologies, in this case argumentation based negotiation methodologies, were developed and applied to solve unforeseeable and, therefore, unavoidable conflicts. The supporting computational model is a distributed belief revision system where argumentation plays the decisive role of revision. The distributed belief revision system detects, isolates and solves, whenever possible, the identified conflicts. The detection and isolation of the conflicts is automatically performed by the distributed consistency mechanism and the resolution of the conflict, or belief revision, is achieved via argumentation. We propose and describe two argumentation protocols intended to solve different types of identified information conflicts: context dependent and context independent conflicts. While the protocol for context dependent conflicts generates new consensual alternatives, the latter chooses to adopt the soundest, strongest argument presented. The paper shows the suitability of using argumentation as a distributed decentralised belief revision protocol to solve unavoidable conflicts.

Belief Revision in Multi-Agent Systems

The ability to respond sensibly to changing and conflicting beliefs is an integral part of intelligent agency. To this end, we outline the design and implementation of a Distributed Assumption-based Truth Maintenance System (DATMS) appropriate for controlling cooperative problem solving in a dynamic real world multi-agent community. Our DATMS works on the principle of local coherence which means that different agents can have different perspectives on the same fact provided that these stances are appropriately justified. The belief revision algorithm is presented, the meta-level code needed to ensure that all system-wide queries can be uniquely answered is described, and the DATMS’ implementation in a general purpose multi-agent shell is discussed.