Susan E. Conry

Multistage negotiation for distributed constraint satisfaction

A cooperation paradigm and coordination protocol for a distributed planning system consisting of a network of semi-autonomous agents with limited internode communication and no centralized control is presented. A multistage negotiation paradigm for solving distributed constraint satisfaction problems in this kind of system has been developed. The strategies presented enable an agent in a distributed planning system to become aware of the extent to which its own local decisions may have adverse nonlocal impact in planning. An example problem is presented in the context of transmission path restoration for dedicated circuits in a communications network. Multistage negotiation provides an agent with sufficient information about the impact of local decisions on a nonlocal state so that the agent may make local decisions that are correct from a global perspective, without attempting to provide a complete global state to all agents. Through multistage negotiation, an agent is able to recognize when a set of global goals cannot be satisfied, and is able to solve a related problem by finding a way of satisfying a reduced set of goals. >

Multistage negotiation in distributed planning

Abstract In this paper we describe a multistage negotiation paradigm for planning in a distributed environment with decentralized control and limited interagent communication. The application domain of interest involves the monitoring and control of a complex communications system. In this domain planning for service restoral is performed in the context of incomplete and possibly invalid information which may be updated dynamically during the course of planning. In addition, the goal of the planning activity may not be achievable — the problem may be overconstrained. Through multistage negotiation, a planner is able to recognize when the problem is overconstrained and to find a solution to an acceptable related problem under these conditions. A key element in this process is the ability to detect sub-goal interactions in a distributed environment and reason about their impact. Multistage negotiation provides a means by which an agent can acquire enough knowledge to reason about the impact of local activity on nonlocal state and modify its behavior accordingly.

Evolutionary algorithms for induction motor parameter determination

This paper demonstrates the applicability of evolutionary algorithms to the problem of motor parameter determination. Motor parameter determination problems can range from high accuracy requirement for motor controlled drives to low accuracy requirements for system studies. The latter problem is addressed here, using both the genetic algorithm and genetic programming. Comparative results are presented.

Distributed automated reasoning: issues in coordination, cooperation, and performance

The authors present a distributed automated reasoning system (DARES) that can perform automated reasoning in, and about, a distributed domain. The technique developed for performing automated reasoning is discussed, with emphasis on issues dealing with task coordination and agent cooperation. Experimental results are presented to illustrate the performance of the system, and its ability to perform distributed automated reasoning. The experimental results demonstrate that agents in a loosely coupled network of problem solvers can work semi-independently, yet focus their attention with the aid of relatively simple heuristics when cooperation is appropriate. >

Fine-grained multiagent systems for the Internet

We present an agent architecture and a system structure that support fine grained multiagent problem solving over the Internet. In our model, each agent works on genetic programming tasks, resides at a workstation on the Internet and is capable of coordinating its activities with a variable number of other agents using the same coordination protocol. The system of agents has a virtual topology that is structured as a loosely coupled network of domains, each of which contains some number of nodes in the overall system. Agents (nodes) cooperate via DGPP, a contract net based high level communication and control protocol. A testbed based on the model has been implemented in Java. Several standard problems were tested. The results showed near linear speed up using six Pentium Pro/Windows NT workstations.

CE2016: Updated computer engineering curriculum guidelines

Joint ACM/IEEE Computer Society undergraduate computer engineering curriculum guidelines are slated for release in 2016. These update the 2004 guidelines commonly known as CE2004. The presenters are part of the task group leading the revisions and will give an overview of the latest draft. Participants will engage in discussions on potential improvements to the guidelines to ensure that they are useful to programs as they work to ensure their curricula reflect the state-of-the-art in computer engineering education and practice and are relevant for the coming decade.

Computer engineering curriculum guidelines

Participants of this pre-conference workshop will learn about the development of computer engineering curricula reports. They will also learn about the revision process and will have the opportunity to provide comment and opinion on drafting an update of the joint ACM and IEEE Computer Society document from 2004 titled, “Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Engineering” known also as CE2004. The authors of this workshop welcome all participation including overall comments and targeted editing assistance from the computer engineering education community. This activity will ensure that an updated document is a forward-looking summary of state-of-the-art educational practices in the computer engineering field.

Launching curricular guidelines for computer engineering: CE2016

ACM and the IEEE Computer Society plan to re-lease their computer engineering curriculum guidelines at the end of this calendar year. The curricular report, tagged CE2016, reflects the state-of-the-art in computer engineering education and practice that would be relevant for the coming decade. This panel presentation provides an overview of the report and it also provides unique perspectives from some steering committee members and other interested parties. The authors and participants will en-gage in discussions on ways to implement the guidelines to form new programs or to modify existing programs. The authors wel-come all audience participation including overall comments and targeted editing assistance from the computer engineering education and industry communities.

CE2016 steering committee: a short update

T he CE2016 Steering Committee, composed of representatives from academia and industry and jointly funded by ACM and the IEEE Computer Society, is charged with updating the 2004 report on curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in computer engineering [1]. The 2004 curriculum guidelines divide the computer engineering Body of Knowledge (BoK) into 18 Knowledge Areas (KAs), with each KA containing a topic list, learning outcomes, and a suggested minimum core coverage time. Obviously, the computer engineering world has seen substantial changes since 2004, prompting the need for a revision. The CE2016 Steering Committee was initially formed in 2011, with community outreach efforts for progress and feedback resulting in a 2012 SIGCSE special session, 2012 Frontiers in Education (FIE) special session, 2013 FIE pre-conference workshop, and a 2014 FIE special session. Much of 2013 was spent in research/ discussion on technological trends within computer engineering since 2004 and its impact on the BoK, particularly in areas such as computer security, multi-core/many-core architectures, system-on-chip design, new software development methods (e.g., Agile) and mobile computing. Initial drafts of revised KAs have been produced and were presented for feedback to participants at the 2014 FIE special session. Looking forward, a draft for public release and feedback is scheduled for spring 2015. Feedback will also be sought at other conference venues in 2015 such as an Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) Division panel discussion at American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Conference and presentations at other conferences such as the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Heads Association (ECEDHA) and FIE. It is hoped that a final draft will be produced in 2016. Community feedback on the various drafts is critical to producing a quality result, so please consider providing comments when the opportunity arises. Further information about the CE2016 effort can be obtained by contacting any of this article’s authors. Ir

Panel session - reflections on international accreditation

Program accreditation in computing, engineering, and technology has many international dimensions. Governments around the world have established agencies or commissions to monitor accreditation activities and professional societies and agencies have undertaken the task over many years. In the 2007–2008 academic year, ABET has stayed its “substantial equivalence” designation and has now engaged in formal accreditation activities beyond the United States. This panel seeks to explore and to present first-hand information regarding the issues and complexities surrounding international accreditation activities and report on their experiences in doing ABET international accreditation. Several panel members, many of whom serve on ABET committees that address these matters and have conducted international accreditation visits, will comment on their experiences, within confidentiality limits. The presentation will focus on the philosophical as well as the practical aspects of accreditation activities outside the United States.