Survival rule usage by software agents

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9311141
  • Patent Number
    9,311,141
  • Date Filed
    Monday, March 26, 2012
    12 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, April 12, 2016
    8 years ago
Abstract
A method for determining the lifespan of an agent utilizing a rule engine and a set of canonical survival rules, in an execution environment comprising collecting a survival rule, asserting a survival data into a working memory and executing the rule engine with the set of survival rules and the working memory.
Description
FIELD

The present disclosure is generally related to software agents and more particularly to software agents' use of rule-based systems.


BACKGROUND

Agents


A software agent is a software abstraction, similar to the object-oriented programming concept of an object. The concept of an agent provides a convenient and powerful way to describe a complex software entity that is capable of acting with a certain degree of autonomy in order to accomplish tasks on behalf of its user. But unlike objects, which are defined in terms of methods and attributes, an agent is defined in terms of its behavior.


Various authors have proposed different definitions of agents, commonly including concepts such as:


Persistence—code is not executed on demand but runs continuously and decides for itself when it should perform some activity


Autonomy—agents have capabilities of task selection, prioritization, goal-directed behavior, decision-making without human intervention


Social Ability—agents are able to engage other components through communication and coordination, they may collaborate on a task


Reactivity—agents perceive the context in which they operate and react to it appropriately.


Agents may also be mobile. They can move from one execution environment to another carrying both their code and their execution state. These execution environments can exist in a variety of devices in a data network including, but not limited to, servers, desktops, laptops, embedded devices, networking equipment and edge devices such as PDAs or cell phones. The characteristics of these platforms may vary widely in terms of computational capacity, networking capacity, display capabilities, etc. An agent must be able to adapt to these conditions.


Historically, agents have been programmed in a procedural manner. That is, agents are programmed with a series of steps that will ultimately result in a goal being achieved. This approach has limitations though as the logic for each agent must be compiled into the agent software and is therefore static. Complex goals can also become intractable for a programmer as the set of rules the agent must follow grows.


Rule-Based Systems


In his tutorial, Introduction to Rule-Based Systems, James Freeman-Hargis defines a rule-based system to consist of a set of assertions and a set of rules for how to act on the assertion set. When a set of data is supplied to the system, it may result in zero or more rules firing. Rule based systems are rather simplistic in nature, consisting of little more than a group of if-then statements, but form the basis of many “expert systems.” In an expert system, the knowledge of an expert is encoded into the rule-set. When a set of data is supplied to the system, the system will come to the same conclusion as the expert. With this approach there is a clear separation between the domain logic (a rule set) and the execution of the agent. As mentioned, the procedural agent approach tightly couples the two.


The rule-based system itself uses a simple technique. It starts with a rule-set, which contains all of the appropriate knowledge encoded into If-Then rules, and a working memory, which mayor may not initially contain any data, assertions or initially known information. The system in operation examines all the rule conditions (IF) and determines a subset, the conflict set, of the rules whose conditions are satisfied based on the working memory. Of this conflict set, one of those rules is triggered (fired). The rule that is chosen is based on a conflict resolution strategy. When the rule is fired, any actions specified in its THEN clause are carried out. These actions can modify the working memory, the rule-set itself, or do just about anything else the system programmer decides to include. This loop of firing rules and performing actions continues until one of two conditions are met: there are no more rules whose conditions are satisfied or a rule is fired whose action specifies the rule engine execution should terminate.


Rule-based systems, as defined above, are adaptable to a variety of problems. In some problems, working memory asserted data is provided with the rules and the system follows them to see where they lead. This approach is known as forward-chaining. An example of this is a medical diagnosis in which the problem is to diagnose the underlying disease based on a set of symptoms (the working memory). A problem of this nature is solved using a forward-chaining, data-driven, system that compares data in the working memory against the conditions (IF parts) of the rules and determines which rules to fire.


In other problems, a goal is specified and the system must find a way to achieve that specified goal. This is known as backward-chaining. For example, if there is an epidemic of a certain disease, this system could presume a given individual had the disease and attempt to determine if its diagnosis is correct based on available information. A backward-chaining, goal-driven, system accomplishes this. To do this, the system looks for the action in the THEN clause of the rules that matches the specified goal. In other words, it looks for the rules that can produce this goal. If a rule is found and fired, it takes each of that rule's conditions as goals and continues until either the available data satisfies all of the goals or there are no more rules that match.


The Rete algorithm is an efficient pattern matching algorithm for implementing forward-chaining, rule-based systems. The Rete algorithm was designed by Dr. Charles L. Forgy of Carnegie Mellon University in 1979. Rete has become the basis for many popular expert systems, including JRules, OPS5, CLIPS, JESS, Drools, and LISA.


A naïve implementation of a rule-based system might check each rule against the known facts in the knowledge base, firing that rule if necessary, then moving on to the next rule (and looping back to the first rule when finished). For even moderate sized rules and fact knowledge-bases, this naïve approach performs far too slowly.


The Rete algorithm (usually pronounced either ‘REET’ or ‘REE-tee’, from the Latin ‘rete’ for net, or network) provides the basis for a more efficient implementation of an expert system. A Rete-based expert system builds a network of nodes, where each node (except the root) corresponds to a pattern occurring in the left-hand-side of a rule. The path from the root node to a leaf node defines a complete rule left-hand-side. Each node has a memory of facts which satisfy that pattern.


As new facts are asserted or modified, they propagate along the network, causing nodes to be annotated when that fact matches that pattern. When a fact or combination of facts causes all of the patterns for a given rule to be satisfied, a leaf node is reached and the corresponding rule is triggered.


The Rete algorithm is designed to sacrifice memory for increased speed. In most cases, the speed increase over naive implementations is several orders of magnitude (because Rete performance is theoretically independent of the number of rules in the system). In very large systems, however, the original Rete algorithm tends to run into memory consumption problems which have driven the design of Rete variants.


Therefore, what is needed is an ability to utilize a set of survival rules by an agent. More specifically what is needed is utilization of survival rules by an agent that uses a rule engine in an execution environment.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides a system, method, and computer readable medium for utilization of survival rules by an agent that uses a rule engine in an execution environment.


In one embodiment of the present invention, a method for determining the lifespan of an agent utilizing a rule engine and a set of canonical survival rules, in an execution environment comprising collecting a survival rule, asserting a survival data into a working memory and executing the rule engine with the set of survival rules and the working memory. The method may also comprise supplying the agent with the survival rule during construction. The method may additionally comprise supplying the agent with the survival rule during movement from a first execution environment to a second execution environment. The method may further comprise collecting the survival rule when the agent that is being moved from a first execution environment to a second execution environment arrives in the second execution environment. The method may also comprise collecting the survival rule from a rule repository in the execution environment. The method may also comprise the survival rule being specific to the agent. The method may additionally comprise the survival rule being specific to the execution environment. The method may further comprise asserting the survival data in the working memory based on a state change in the agent. The method may also comprise asserting the survival data in the working memory based on a timer event in the execution environment. The method may further comprise asserting the survival data in the working memory based on firing the survival rule by the rule engine.


In another embodiment of the present invention, a computer readable medium for determining the lifespan of an agent utilizing a rule engine and a set of canonical survival rules in a first execution environment comprising instructions for asserting an initial set of survival data into a working memory, collecting the set of survival rules, compiling the set of survival rules, executing the rule engine with the set of survival rules and a working memory, asserting the survival data into the working memory and firing a survival rule by the rule engine. The computer readable medium may also comprise instructions for collecting the set of survival rules from a rule repository in a second execution environment. The computer readable medium may additionally comprise instructions for asserting a survival data into the working memory as a result of firing the survival rule that requires extending the life of the agent. The computer readable medium may further comprise instructions for updating a lifespan timer in the execution environment of the agent as a result of firing the survival rule that requires extending the life of the agent. The computer readable medium may also comprise instructions for destroying the agent as a result of firing the survival rule that requires termination of the agent. The computer readable medium may additionally comprise instructions for capturing rule statistics as a result of firing the survival rule that requires termination of the agent. The computer readable medium may further comprise instructions for asserting the survival data in the working memory based on receiving a lifespan update request from an application. The computer readable medium may also comprise instructions for updating a lifespan timer in the execution environment of the agent based on receiving a lifespan update request from an application.


In a further embodiment of the present invention, a system for determining the lifespan of an agent utilizing a rule engine and a set of canonical survival rules in a first execution environment comprising a working memory for the agent in the first execution environment and a first processor communicably coupled to the first memory, wherein the processor collects the set of canonical survival rules, compiles the set of survival rules, executes the rule engine with the set of compiled survival rules and the working memory, fires a survival rule, asserts a survival data into the working memory as a result of the rule firing, and sends a heartbeat to an originating application as a result of the rule firing. The system may further comprise a second memory stores the originating application and a second processor communicably coupled to the second memory, wherein the second processor executes the originating application that receives the heartbeat.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent locally with a set of canonical rules supplied during construction;



FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of canonical rules supplied during construction;



FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent in a remote execution environment during which a set of canonical rules is retrieved from outside the execution environment;



FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying canonical rules from a first execution environment;



FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying canonical rules to a second execution environment;



FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of an agent utilizing a rule-based system engine for execution;



FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent locally with a set of compiled rules supplied during construction;



FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of compiled rules supplied during construction;



FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely during which a set of compiled rules that are retrieved from outside the execution environment;



FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying compiled rules from a first execution environment;



FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying compiled rules to a second execution environment;



FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of canonical rules carried by the agent and a set of canonical execution environment rules resident in a remote environment;



FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of canonical rules fetched by the agent and a set of canonical execution environment rules resident in a remote environment;



FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying canonical rules from a first execution environment that includes execution environment rules;



FIG. 15 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying canonical rules to a second execution environment that includes a repository of canonical execution environment rules;



FIG. 16 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent at a remote location with an as-needed set of canonical rules supplied during construction;



FIG. 17 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent at a remote location with an as-needed set of canonical rules fetched during construction;



FIG. 18 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent with supplied as-needed canonical rules from a first execution environment;



FIG. 19 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent with supplied as-needed canonical rules to a second execution environment;



FIG. 20 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent from a first execution environment with a fetched as-needed set of canonical rules;



FIG. 21 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent to a second execution environment with a fetched as-needed set of canonical rules;



FIG. 22 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of a rule-based agent updating rule history when rule processing is halted in an execution environment;



FIG. 23 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of a rule-based agent identifying and carrying only needed canonical rules during as part of movement to another execution environment;



FIG. 24 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of an agent using a set of survival rules to determine its lifespan; and



FIG. 25 is a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of an agent using a set of data narrowing rules to determine how much data should be sent over the network.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Construction


Agents which utilize rule based systems may be constructed locally or remotely. In order to operate, these agents need an initial set of canonical rules that can be compiled and loaded into an associated rule engine. These rules can either be supplied at construction or a rule repository location can be supplied so that the rules may be fetched during construction or at a later time.


Referring now to FIG. 1, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent locally with a set of canonical rules supplied during construction is shown. An application 110, in an execution environment 112, requests a set of rules for an agent from a rule repository 116 based on the goals of the agent that is being created. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 118. The rule set 118 is passed to the agent 120 during construction. The agent 120 takes the rule set 118 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 122. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 124. At this point the agent creates the rule engine 126 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if the execution environment 112 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 126 is created or located, the agent 120 supplies the engine 126 with the compiled rule set 124. Finally, the agent 120 requests a new working memory 128 from the rule engine 126. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 120 is ready to be moved to another execution environment or to execute the rule engine. Both of these processes are described in detail in later sections.


Referring now to FIG. 2, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of canonical rules supplied during construction is shown. An application 218, in execution environment 212, requests a set of rules for an agent from a rule repository 220 in execution environment 214 based on the goals of the agent that is being created. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 222. The rule set 222 is passed to the agent 224 during construction in execution environment 216. The agent 224 in execution environment 216 takes the rule set 222 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 226. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 228. At this point the agent creates the rule engine 230 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if execution environment 216 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 230 is created or located, the agent 224 supplies the engine 230 with the compiled rule set 228. Finally, the agent 224 requests a new working memory 232 from the rule engine 230. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 224 is ready to be moved to another execution environment or to execute the rule engine.


Referring now to FIG. 3, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent in a remote execution environment during which a set of canonical rules is retrieved from outside the execution environment is shown. An application 318, in execution environment 312, requests the creation of an agent 324 in execution environment 316. Agent 324 is passed the location of a rule repository 320 during construction. During construction, the agent 324 requests a set of rules based on its goals from the rule repository 320 in execution environment 314. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 322. The agent 324 in execution environment 316 takes the rule set 322 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 326. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 328. At this point the agent creates the rule engine 330 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if execution environment 314 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 330 is created or located, the agent 324 supplies the engine 330 with the compiled rule set 328. Finally, the agent 324 requests a new working memory 332 from the rule engine 330. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 324 is ready to be moved to another execution environment or to execute the rule engine.


Movement


An agent may move from one execution environment to another. This process may be initiated by a variety of means including but not limited to an application, another agent, another object, the existing agent itself, a human interacting with the execution environment or a rule executing in the agent's rule engine.


Referring now to FIGS. 4 and 5, diagrams illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying canonical rules from one execution environment to another are shown. An application 418 in execution environment 412 requests that an agent 424 in execution environment 414 move to execution environment 416. The location of execution environment 416 may be described in the move request by an IP address and port, Uniform Resource Locator (URL), or any other means of addressing. The agent 424 discards its rule engine 430 along with the associated compiled rule set 428 and working memory 432. The agent 424 then encodes itself along with its canonical rule set 422 into a transferable form 434. Though a byte array is shown, the encoded agent could take any form that can be transferred between the two execution environments. Once the agent 424 has created an encoded version of itself 434 in execution environment 414 it transfers the encoded version 434 to an agent manager 426 residing in execution environment 416.


Referring now to FIG. 5, the process continues with the agent manager 522 receiving the encoded agent 534. Upon receipt of the encoded agent 534, the agent manager 522 decodes the encoded agent 534 into a new version of the agent 524 and the agent's canonical rule set 526 in execution environment 516. Once the agent 524 and rule set 526 have been materialized, the agent manager 522 requests that the agent 524 initialize. This request prompts the agent 524 to go to the execution environment's rule compiler 520 and request compilation of its canonical rule set 526. The result is a compiled rule set 528. The agent then creates a new rule engine 530 and subsequently passes the compiled rule set 528 to it. As during construction, if the execution environment has a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. Once the engine 530 has been located/created and the compiled rule set 528 has been added to it, the agent 524 requests a new working memory from the rule engine. As before, the working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 524 is ready to execute the rule engine. Once the move operation completes, the old version of the agent 518 in execution environment 514 indicates to the requesting application 518 in execution environment 512 that the move operation has completed. Once the notification has been made, the old agent 534 is destroyed.


Execution


Once an agent has been initialized in an execution environment through either creation or movement, it can be sent requests to perform different tasks. These tasks mayor may not require sending one or more responses. Recall that during construction an agent is associated with a newly created or resident rule engine and that a rule set is provided to that engine.


Referring now to FIG. 6, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of an agent utilizing a rule-based system engine for execution is shown. An application 616 in execution environment 612 sends a request to an agent 618 in execution environment 614. Upon receiving the request, the agent 618, collects an initial set of data and asserts it into its working memory 624 in order to accomplish the task requested. Note that this data may be collected from the local execution environment, from an accessible database, from other objects, from other agents, from a human via a man machine interface, from a computer readable medium or any combinations of the above. With a provided compiled rule set 620, and an initial set of data in working memory 624, the rule engine 622 is then started by the agent 618.


When the engine 622 starts, it processes the objects in working memory against the rule set 620. This may result in one or more rules being fired by the engine 622. When a rule is fired it may add, modify or delete objects in working memory 624. Additionally, the engine 622 can inform the agent 618 which may result in a number of actions being taken by the agent 618 including, but not limited to, the collection and assertion of additional data into the working memory 624 (shown) and/or sending of a preliminary response back to the application. This sequence will continue until the task is completed, there are no more rules available to fire, or the agent receives an event, such as move or terminate, causing it to halt rule engine processing. Upon completion of the task, the agent 618 may send a response back to the application 616 that initiated the request (shown).


Pre-Compiled Agent Rule Set Usage


As noted above, the process of adding rules to the rule engine can be expensive in terms of CPU utilization on the execution environment in which the operation is performed. This can be problematic for less powerful hosts such as personal devices (cell phones, PDAs, etc.) and servers with limited available CPU resources. Therefore, another embodiment of the invention creates the compiled rule set in the execution environment of the application that creates an agent instead of in the environment in which the agent is constructed or moved.


Referring now to FIG. 7, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent locally with a set of compiled rules supplied during construction is shown. An application 712, in execution environment 714, requests a set of rules for an agent from a rule repository 720 based on the goals of the agent that is being created. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 724. The application 712 takes the rule set 724 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 722. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 724. The rule set 724 is passed to the agent 718 during construction. At this point the agent creates the rule engine 726 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if the execution environment 714 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 726 is created or located, the agent 722 supplies the engine 726 with the compiled rule set 724. Finally, the agent 110 requests a new working memory 728 from the rule engine 726. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 718 is ready to be moved to another execution environment or to execute the rule engine.


Referring now to FIG. 8, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of compiled rules supplied during construction is shown. An application 812, in execution environment 814, requests a set of rules for an agent from a rule server 828 in execution environment 818 based on the goals of the agent that is being created. The rule server 828 queries a rule repository 830 for the rules. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 832. The rule server 828 in execution environment 202 takes the rule set 832 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 834. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 826. The compiled rule set 826 is passed to the agent 820 during construction in execution environment 204. At this point, the agent 820 creates the rule engine 822 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if execution environment 816 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 822 is created or located, the agent 820 supplies the engine 822 with the compiled rule set 826. Finally, the agent 820 requests a new working memory 116 from the rule engine 822. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 820 is ready to execute the rule engine.


Referring now to FIG. 9, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent in a remote execution environment during which a set of compiled rules is retrieved from outside the execution environment is shown. An application 912, in execution environment 914, requests the creation of an agent 920 in execution environment 916. Agent 920 is passed the location of a rule server 928, resident in execution environment 918, during construction. During construction, the agent 920 requests a set of compiled rules based on its goals from the rule server 928 in execution environment 918. The rule server 928 queries a rule repository 930 for a set of rules. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 932. The rule server 928 in execution environment 918 takes the rule set 932 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 934. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 926. At this point the agent 920 creates a rule engine 922 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if execution environment 916 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 922 is created or located, the agent 920 supplies the engine 922 with the compiled rule set 926. Finally, the agent 920 requests a new working memory 924 from the rule engine 922. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 920 is ready to execute the rule engine.


Referring now to FIGS. 10-11, diagrams illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying compiled rules from one execution environment to another are shown. An application 1018 in execution environment 1012 request that an agent 1022 in execution environment 1014 move to execution environment 1016. The location of execution environment 1016 may be described in the move request by an IP address and port, Uniform Resource Locator (URL), or any other means of addressing. The agent 1022 discards its rule engine 1030 along with the associated working memory 1032. Subsequently, the agent 1022 discards its canonical rule set 1020 if it still has a reference to it. The agent 1022 then encodes itself along with its compiled rule set 1028 into a transferable form 1024. Though a byte array is shown, the encoded agent could take any form that can be transferred between the two execution environments. Once the agent 1022 has created an encoded version of itself 1024 in execution environment 1014 it transfers the encoded version 1024 to an agent manager 1026 residing in execution environment 1016.


Referring now to FIG. 11, the process continues with an agent manager 1122 receiving an encoded agent 1134. Upon receipt of the encoded agent 1134, the agent manager 1122 decodes the encoded agent 1134 into a new version of the agent 1124 and its compiled rule set 1128 in execution environment 1116. Once the agent 1124 and rule set 1128 have been decoded, the agent manager 1122 requests that the agent 1124 initialize. This request prompts the agent 1124 to create a new rule engine 1130 and subsequently pass the compiled rule set 1128 to it. As during construction, if the execution environment has a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. Once the engine 1130 has been located/created and the compiled rule set 1128 has been added to it, the agent 1124 requests a new working memory 1132 from the rule engine. As before, the working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 1124 is ready to execute the rule engine. Once the move operation completes, the old version of the agent 1118 in execution environment 1114 indicates to the requesting application 1118 in execution environment 1112 that the move operation has completed. Once the notification has been made, the old agent 1118 is destroyed.


Execution Environment Rule Set Usage


Each execution environment may have access to a local rule repository which allow for the rules for a particular domain, domain rules, to be distributed, or partitioned, in any number of rule repositories. An agent may be configured to only use rules provided at construction essentially ignoring rules available from each execution environment's local rule repository. The more general case is for the agent to make use of the rules that it carries with itself along with the rules extracted from the execution environment's local rule repository. Local rule repositories may contain rules for several different domains and are usually specific to execution environment objects that will be asserted to working memory but may also apply to execution environment concerns such as security, resource usage, scheduling, or any other execution environment attribute.


Referring now to FIG. 12, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of canonical rules carried by the agent and a set of canonical rules resident in a remote environment is shown. An application 1218, in execution environment 1212, requests a set of rules for an agent from a rule repository 1220 in execution environment 1214 based on the goals of the agent that is being created. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 1230. The rule set 1230 is passed to the agent 1232 during construction in execution environment 1216. During construction, the agent 1232 requests the set of rules from a local rule repository 1234 given the agent's domain (not shown). The result of which, canonical rule set 1236, is then merged with the construction supplied rule set 1230 to form a merged rule set 1222. This rule set contains all the domain and environment specific rules that the agents' rule engine will execute. The agent 1232 then takes the merged rule set 1222 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 1226. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 1238. At this point the agent creates a rule engine 1224 that will be used to execute the rule set 1238. Note that if execution environment 1216 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 1224 is created or located, the agent 1232 supplies the engine 1224 with the compiled rule set 1238. Finally, the agent 1232 requests a new working memory 1228 from the rule engine 1224. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine.


Referring now to FIG. 13, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent remotely with a set of canonical rules fetched by the agent and a set of canonical local rules resident in a remote environment is shown. An application 1318, in execution environment 1312, requests the creation of an agent 1332 in execution environment 1316. Agent 1332 is passed the location of a rule repository 1320 during construction. During construction, the agent 1332 requests a set of rules based on its goals from the rule repository 1320 in execution environment 1314. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 1330. During construction, the agent 1332 requests the set of rules from a local rule repository 1334 that apply to its domain. The result of which, canonical rule set 1336, is then merged with the fetched rule set 104 to form a merged rule set 1322. This rule set contains all the domain and environment specific rules that the agents' rule engine will execute. The agent 1332 then takes the merged rule set 1322 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 1326. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 1338. At this point the agent creates a rule engine 1324 that will be used to execute the rule set 1338. Note that if execution environment 1316 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 1324 is created or located, the agent 1332 supplies the engine 1324 with the compiled rule set 1338. Finally, the agent 1332 requests a new working memory 1328 from the rule engine 1324. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine.


Referring now to FIGS. 14-15, diagrams illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent carrying canonical rules to an execution environment that includes a local repository of canonical rules are shown. Referring now to FIG. 14, an application 1418 in execution environment 1412 requests that an agent 1422 in execution environment 1414 move to execution environment 1416. The location of execution environment 1416 may be described in the move request by an IP address and port, Uniform Resource Locator (URL), or any other means of addressing. The agent 1422 discards its rule engine 1430 along with the associated compiled rule set 1428 and working memory 1432. The agent 1422 then encodes itself along with its canonical rule set 1420 into a transferable form 1424. Though a byte array is shown, the encoded agent could take any form that can be transferred between the two execution environments. Once the agent 1422 has created an encoded version of itself 1424 in execution environment 1414 it transfers the encoded version 1424 to an agent manager 1426 residing in execution environment 1416.


Referring now to FIG. 15, the process continues with the agent manager 1522 receiving the encoded agent 1534. Upon receipt of the encoded agent 1534, the agent manager 1522 decodes the encoded agent 1534 into a new agent 1526 and its canonical rule set 1540 in execution environment 1516. Once the agent 1526 and rule set 1540 have been decoded, the agent manager 1522 requests that the agent 1526 initialize. This request prompts the agent 1526 to request the set of rules applicable to the agent's domain from a local rule repository 1536. The result of which, canonical rule set 1538, is then merged with the carried rule set 1540 to form a merged rule set 1534. This rule set contains all the domain and environment specific rules that the agents rule engine will execute. The agent 1526 then takes the merged rule set 1534 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 1524. The result is a compiled rule set 1528. The agent then creates a new rule engine 1530 and subsequently passes the compiled rule set 1528 to it. As during construction, if the execution environment has a sharable rule engine, then one may not need to be created. Once the engine 1530 has been located/created and the compiled rule set 1528 has been added to it, the agent 1526 requests a new working memory 1532 from the rule engine. As before, the working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. Once the move operation completes, the old version of the agent 1520 in execution environment 1514 indicates to the requesting application 1518 in execution environment 1512 that the move operation has completed. Once the notification has been made, the old agent 1520 is destroyed.


As-Needed Rules


As there is a cost of carrying around unnecessary rules in terms of both CPU and memory usage, it is desirable in many cases to supply an agent with a subset of its total potential rule set. This can be done in a context-specific manner based on the goals and execution environment of the agent. For example, if each device upon which an agent will be executing only contains a small screen, then there is no need to carry the rules for display on a standard computer monitor. As another example, an agent who moves progressively further in a single direction, perhaps among GPS enabled fixed location devices, need not carry rules that only apply to previous GPS locations.


Referring now to FIG. 16, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent at a remote location with an as-needed set of canonical rules supplied during construction is shown. An application 1618, in execution environment 1612, requests a set of rules for an agent from a rule repository 1620 in execution environment 1614 based on the goals and initial execution environment of the agent that is being created. When supplied with a target execution environment, the rule repository 1620 can filter out rules that do not apply to that type of environment. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 1622. The rule set 1622 is passed to the agent 1624 during construction in execution environment 1616. The agent 1624 in execution environment 1616 takes the rule set 1622 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 1626. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 1628. At this point the agent creates the rule engine 1630 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if execution environment 1616 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 1630 is created or located, the agent 1624 supplies the engine 1630 with the compiled rule set 1628. Finally, the agent 1624 requests a new working memory 1632 from the rule engine 1630. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 1624 is ready to be moved to another execution environment or to execute the rule engine.


Referring now to FIG. 17, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of constructing an agent at a remote location with an as-needed set of canonical rules fetched during construction is shown. An application 1718, in execution environment 1712, requests the creation of an agent 1724 in execution environment 1716. Agent 1724 is passed the location of a rule repository 1720 during construction. During construction, the agent 1724 requests a set of rules based on its goals and execution environment from the rule repository 1720 in execution environment 1714. When supplied with the target execution environment, the rule repository 1720 can filter out rules that do not apply to that type of environment. The result is a collection of canonical rules, known as a rule set 1722. The agent 1724 in execution environment 204 takes the rule set 1722 and requests that it be compiled by the local rule compiler 1726. This results in the creation of a compiled rule set 1728. At this point the agent creates the rule engine 1730 that will be used to execute the rule set. Note that if execution environment 1714 includes a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. After the rule engine 1730 is created or located, the agent 1724 supplies the engine 1730 with the compiled rule set 1728. Finally, the agent 1724 requests a new working memory 1732 from the rule engine 1730. The working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. At this point, the agent 1724 is ready to be moved to another execution environment or to execute the rule engine.


Referring now to FIGS. 18-19, diagrams illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent from one execution environment to another with a supplied as-needed set of canonical rules are shown. An application 1818 in execution environment 1812 requests that an agent 1822 in execution environment 1814 move to execution environment 1816. The location of execution environment 1816 may be described in the move request by an IP address and port, Uniform Resource Locator (URL), or any other means of addressing. The move request includes a new as-needed canonical rule set 1834 based on the agent's goals and target execution environment. The agent 1822 discards its rule engine 1830 along with the associated compiled rule set 1828 and working memory 1832. In addition the agent 1822 discards its old canonical rule set 1820. At this point, the agent 1822 encodes itself along with its new as-needed canonical rule set 1834 into a transferable form 1824. Though a byte array is shown, the encoded agent could take any form that can be transferred between the two execution environments. Once the agent 1822 has created an encoded version of itself 1824 in execution environment 1814 it transfers the encoded version 1824 to an agent manager 1826 residing in execution environment 1816.


Referring now to FIG. 19, the process continues with the agent manager 1922 receiving an encoded agent 1934. Upon receipt of the encoded agent 1934, the agent manager 118 decodes the encoded agent 1934 into a new version of the agent 1924 and its new canonical rule set 1926 in execution environment 1916. Once the agent 1924 and rule set 1926 have been materialized, the agent manager 1922 requests that the agent 1922 initialize. This request prompts the agent 1922 to go to the execution environments' rule compiler 1920 and request compilation of its canonical rule set 1926. The result is a compiled rule set 1928. The agent then creates a new rule engine 1930 and subsequently passes the compiled rule set 1928 to it. As during construction, if the execution environment has a rule engine, then one may not need to be created. Once the engine 1928 has been located/created and the compiled rule set 1926 has been added to it, the agent 1922 requests a new working memory from the rule engine. As before, the working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. Once the move operation completes, the old version of the agent 1918 in execution environment 1914 indicates to the requesting application 1918 in execution environment 1912 that the move operation has completed. Once the notification has been made, the old agent 1934 is destroyed.


Referring now to FIGS. 20-21, diagrams illustrating an exemplary process of moving an agent from one execution environment to another with a fetched as-needed set of canonical rules are shown. An application 2018 in execution environment 2012 requests that an agent 2022 in execution environment 2014 move to execution environment 2016. The location of execution environment 2016 may be described in the move request by an IP address and port, Uniform Resource Locator (URL), or any other means of addressing. The move request includes a reference to a rule repository 2038 from which the agent should fetch a new as-needed rule set. Upon receiving the move request, the agent 2022 requests a new as-needed rule set from the supplied rule repository 2038 based on its goals and target execution environment 2016. After receiving the new canonical rule set 2034, the agent 2022 discards its rule engine 2030 along with the associated compiled rule set 2028 and working memory 2032. In addition the agent 2022 discards its old canonical rule set 2020. At this point, the agent 2022 encodes itself along with its new as-needed canonical rule set 2034 into a transferable form 2024. Though a byte array is shown, the encoded agent could take any form that can be transferred between the two execution environments. Once the agent 2022 has created an encoded version of itself 2024 in execution environment 2014 it transfers the encoded version 2024 to an agent manager 2026 residing in execution environment 2016.


Referring now to FIG. 21, the process continues with the agent manager 2122 receiving an encoded agent 2134. Upon receipt of the encoded agent 2134, the agent manager 2122 decodes the encoded agent 2134 into a new version of the agent 2124 and its new canonical rule set 2126 in execution environment 204. Once the agent 2124 and rule set 124 have been materialized, the agent manager 2122 requests that the agent 2124 initialize. This request prompts the agent 2124 to go to the execution environment's rule compiler 2120 and request compilation of its canonical rule set 2126. The result is a compiled rule set 2128. The agent then creates a new rule engine 130 and subsequently passes the compiled rule set 2128 to it. As during construction, if the execution environment has a sharable rule engine, then one may not need to be created. Once the engine 2130 has been located/created and the compiled rule set 2126 has been added to it, the agent 2124 requests a new working memory from the rule engine. As before, the working memory will hold all of the data the agent chooses to assert before and during execution of the rule engine. Once the move operation completes, the old version of the agent 2138 in execution environment 2114 indicates to the requesting application 2118 in execution environment 2112 that the move operation has completed. Once the notification has been made, the old agent 2138 is destroyed.


Dynamic Determination of Needed Rules


Large rule sets, even with efficient algorithms such as Rete, are often expensive in computation and bandwidth. The process of dynamically removing rules considered unlikely to be useful has a benefit to performance and also, combined with mobile agents, provides an efficient method for utilizing large rule sets that can be partitioned across many repositories. This method also allows an agent to dynamically change the rules to meet the execution environment processing task.


Each constructed agent has a unique identifier for itself and this identifier is also known to the agent's originator. At the point of origination, this identifier will be associated with the agent's outcome. An example outcome is successfully attaining an end goal and sending the results back to the application. Another example outcome is the loss or death of the agent. An agent that is determined to be lost or dead may cause a replacement agent to be launched. The replacement agent will have a unique identifier that differs from the original agent. In addition to a unique agent identifier, an agent also carries with it an indicative subset of the set of previously completed agent outcomes for the given domain. This is a set of unique identifiers and outcomes for agents that have previously executed in the domain of the current agent.


In each execution environment, the local rule repository not only stores rules, but is also the location for agents to record statistics about rule engine activity for the rules in the rule set given to the rule engine. These instrumented rules include agent carried rules and rules for the domain that were retrieved from the local rule repository. Alternately, only the locally acquired domain rules may be instrumented.


Referring now to FIG. 22, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of a rule-based agent updating rule statistics when rule processing has completed in an execution environment is shown. As before, an agent 2218 starts its associated rule engine 2222 to process its compiled rule set 2220. During the course of execution, the rule engine 2222 may successfully match part of the condition (left hand side) of a rule, may match the condition of a rule and activate it, or may match and activate and fire a rule (perform the consequences of the rule). A rule engine may provide for collection of the statistics for the phases of rule activity mentioned. Alternately, the agent may integrate listener code to monitor these phases of rule execution and collect the statistics as the rule engine executes. A rule being fired may result in the rule asserting new data into the working memory 2224 and/or the agent 2218 collecting more data and asserting that into the working memory 2224. Once an end goal terminates rule processing, or the agent receives a move event, a termination event, a timeout or some other event, then the rule engine is halted. At this point, the agent 2218 requests rule statistics from the rule engine 2222 or collects the statistics from the agent's rule engine listener. These statistics may include, but are not limited to the number of times a rule was fired, the number of times a rule was activated, the number of times a goal in the condition of a rule was matched, the number of times a part of the condition of a rule was matched, or any combination of the above. The statistics 2226 are then added to aggregate rule history stored in the local rule repository 2216. These stored statistics may include statistics for rules that are not available in the local rule repository since an agent can carry rules with it as it moves.


When the agent prepares to move to another execution environment it dynamically determines to remove unnecessary rules by consulting the rule history associated with some or all of the rules in its current rule set in conjunction with the indicative subset of previously completed agent outcomes that the agent carries. Referring now to FIG. 23, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of a rule-based agent dynamically removing unnecessary rules as part of movement to another execution environment is shown. An application 2318 requests that an agent 2326 in execution environment 2314 move to execution environment 2316. The agent 2326 requests a set of rules from the local rule repository 2322 that are allowed to be carried to other platforms. The result is a canonical rule set 2334. This rule set is then merged with the set of rules 2320 that the agent 2326 carried with it to execution environment 2314. The result is canonical rule set 2336.


At this point the agent consults the local rule repository 2322 to get the rule history 2330 of the rules in set 2336. The agent 2326 then uses the rule history 2330 with its carried set of previous agent outcomes to remove rules from rule set 2336 that are unlikely to participate in a desired outcome. The statistics are used in aggregate form. As an example consider an agent that carries the results of 2318 previously executed agents and their outcomes, 50 of which were desirable outcomes. The agent examines the metrics for a particular rule named “A” which shows that it was never activated. The agent then removes rule “A” from its agent carried rule set. As another example consider rule “B” which has been activated and fired in one-third of previous desirable outcomes but also has been active and fired in nearly all negative outcomes. Rule “B” remains in the agent carried rule set. Finally, a rule, “C”, which never activates for any as yet recorded desired outcomes but has been active in almost all negative outcomes can be considered a computational burden and removed from the agent carried rule set. Although activation is a criterion above, finer grained partial left-hand side matching statistics can be used as well. Since rule removal requires an aggregate of previous runs a threshold is provided so that no rule deletion is permitted until a requisite number of outcomes has been obtained.


Once the pruned rule set 2332 has been created, the agent 2326 encodes itself along with its pruned rule set 2332 into a transferable form in execution environment 2314. The agent 2326 then transfers the encoded version of itself in execution environment 2314 to an agent manager 2346 resident in the target execution environment 2316. The remainder of the move process follows that of FIG. 5.


Survivability Rules


All agents have a lifespan; but that lifespan need not be pre-determined if a set of rules around survivability of an agent is put in place. These rules may be agent specific or execution environment specific. They may be carried with the agent or resident in a rule repository for the execution environment. As these rules are like any other declarative rules, they may be any combination of the above according to the teachings of this invention. In addition, these rules may be used in conjunction with more typical survivability mechanisms such as heartbeats between the application and the agent.


Referring now to FIG. 24, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of an agent using a set of survival rules to determine its lifespan is shown. Agent survivability is controlled by the rules loaded in the local compiled rule set 2428. As before, the local rule set may be comprised of rules supplied or fetched from rule repository 2420 during construction, rules carried from other visited execution environments and/or execution environment specific rules retrieved from rule repository 2426. Many sources of data that may be asserted into the working memory and, combined with the local rule set 2428, affect the agent's 2424 lifespan. Examples include lifespan update events from application 2418, heartbeat events from application 2418, timer events from the execution environment's timer system 2434, and even state change events from the agent 2424 itself. As data is asserted into the working memory, the rules engine guarantees that applicable rules are fired. Any number of rules might result in the agent 2424 taking actions that affect its survivability. This includes death of the agent 2424 which is shown. When an agent 104 dies it halts rule engine processing, records any collected historical statistics for the local rule set and stores these in the rule repository 2436.


Data Narrowing Rules


Agent may visit many execution environments each with differing levels of network connectivity or an execution environment with multiple levels/types of network connectivity. Given this, it is important that an agent take this into consideration when responding to application requests, sending periodic reports, and determining how much data to carry with it when moving. As per the teachings of this invention, execution environment specific rules are an ideal method for insuring the appropriate agent behavior. If the networking capabilities of the execution environment are static, then rules for this may be maintained in the rule repository on the execution environment running the application that launched the agent. In many cases though, the capabilities may be more dynamic in which case the rules regarding network bandwidth are better kept on the remote execution environment.


Referring now to FIG. 25, a diagram illustrating an exemplary process of the of an agent using a set of data narrowing rules to determine how much data should be sent over the network is shown. This diagram shows the same agent in three different scenarios. As before, each agent is communicating with an application 2532 that in this case is hosted on server 2530 which is connected to a high-speed data network, 2534. In the first scenario, the agent 2514 has been constructed on or moved to server execution environment 2512, which is connected to the high speed data network directly via a gigabit ethernet link 2544. The agent 2514 utilized a rule-based system that is driven by the associated rule engine 2516. This engine 2516 has been loaded with execution environment specific rules about the current network bandwidth capabilities of the execution environment 2512. In this example the agent 106 completes a task which will ultimately generate a report back to the application 2532 on execution environment 2530. When that task completes, that event causes a rule to fire in the engine 2516, which instructs the agent 2514 to send a detailed report. In this case, a detailed report is appropriate because a high bandwidth connection is available between the agent 2514 and the application 2532.


In the second scenario, that same agent now labeled 114 has moved to a home computer 2518 which is connected to the network via a DSL connection 2546. As before, the engine 2522 is loaded with the execution environment specific rules regarding bandwidth available to the execution environment. As the agent 2520 completes its task, the event causes a rule to fire, which instructs agent 2520 to send a full report, which contains less data than the detailed report described previously. Note, that the agent 2520 is not compressing the same data, but sending a different data-set back—a subset of the data to fit the bandwidth available.


In the final scenario, the agent, now labeled 2526 has moved to the mobile device 2524. The mobile device is connected to the high speed data network via a relatively low speed cellular data network 2536. As before, the agent 2526 completes its task which results in the rule engine 2528 firing a rule. This firing causes the agent 2526 to dispatch a much smaller summary report to the application 2532 in order to accommodate the low bandwidth connection.


Methods, computer readable media and systems have been shown and/or described in the above embodiments for movement of an agent that utilizes a compiled set of canonical rules. Although the above descriptions set forth embodiments, it will be understood that there is no intent to limit the invention by such disclosure, but rather, it is intended to cover all modifications and alternate implementations falling within the spirit and scope of the invention. For example, the present invention should not be limited to a single agent, or to a particular programming language for the execution environment. Furthermore, the association of agent to execution environments is not limited to the topology depicted. Lastly, the embodiments are intended to cover capabilities and concepts whether they be via a loosely couple set of components or they be converged into one or more integrated components, devices, circuits, and/or software programs.

Claims
  • 1. An apparatus comprising: a memory; anda processor operatively coupled to the memory, wherein the processor is configured to: collect a set of canonical survival rules associated with a first execution environment and associated with a mobile agent;compile the set of canonical survival rules;execute a rule engine of the mobile agent with the set of canonical survival rules;store a heartbeat from an originating application in a working memory associated with an agent;fire a survival rule from the set of canonical survival rules based upon the heartbeat being stored in the working memory;assert survival data into the memory as a result of firing the survival rule;receive a request to move the mobile agent to a second execution environment;determine a first rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has never fired;determine a second rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has been fired;determine a third rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has been active in only negative outcomes, wherein the first rule and third rule are removed to create a filtered set of canonical survival rules;encode the mobile agent with the filtered set of canonical survival rules; andtransmit the encoded mobile agent to the second execution environment, wherein the second execution environment decodes and executes the mobile agent, wherein the mobile agent uses the filtered set of canonical survival rules in the second execution environment.
  • 2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the set of canonical survival rules is specific to the mobile agent.
  • 3. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the set of canonical survival rules is specific to an execution environment of the apparatus.
  • 4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the survival data is asserted into the memory based at least in part on a state change of the mobile agent.
  • 5. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the survival data is asserted into the working memory based at least in part on a timer event in an execution environment of the apparatus.
  • 6. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to request a second set of canonical survival rules based upon the received request to move the mobile agent to a second execution environment.
  • 7. The apparatus of claim 6, wherein the processor is further configured to merge the second set of canonical survival rules with the first set of canonical survival rules.
  • 8. A method comprising: collecting, by a processor of a computing device, a set of canonical survival rules associated with a first execution environment and associated with a mobile agent;compiling the set of canonical survival rules;executing a rule engine of the mobile agent with the set of canonical survival rules;storing a heartbeat from an originating application in a working memory associated with an agent;firing a survival rule from the set of canonical survival rules based upon the heartbeat being stored in the working memory;asserting survival data into a memory of the computing device as a result of firing the survival rule;receiving a request to move the mobile agent to a second execution environment;determining a first rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has never fired;determining a second rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has been fired;determining a third rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has been active in only negative outcomes, wherein the first rule and third rule are removed to create the filtered set of canonical survival rules;encoding the mobile agent with the filtered set of canonical survival rules; andtransmitting the encoded mobile agent to the second execution environment, wherein the second execution environment decodes and executes the mobile agent, wherein the mobile agent uses the filtered set of canonical survival rules in the second execution environment.
  • 9. The method of claim 8, wherein the set of canonical survival rules is specific to the mobile agent.
  • 10. The method of claim 8, wherein the set of canonical survival rules is specific to an execution environment of the computing device.
  • 11. The method of claim 8, wherein the survival data is asserted into the working memory based at least in part on a state change of the mobile agent.
  • 12. A tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, the computer-readable instructions comprising: instructions to collect a set of canonical survival rules associated with a first execution environment and associated with a mobile agent;instructions to compile the set of canonical survival rules;instructions to execute a rule engine of the mobile agent with the set of canonical survival rules;instructions to store a heartbeat from an originating application in a working memory associated with an agent;instructions to fire a survival rule from the set of canonical survival rules based upon the heartbeat being stored in the working memory;instructions to assert survival data into a memory of a computing device as a result of firing the survival rule;instructions to receive a request to move the mobile agent to a second execution environment;instructions to determine a first rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has never fired;instructions to determine a second rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has been fired;instructions to determine a third rule from the first set of canonical survival rules has been active in only negative outcomes, wherein the first rule and third rule are removed to create the filtered set of canonical survival rules;instructions to encode the mobile agent with the filtered set of canonical survival rules; andinstructions to transmit the encoded mobile agent to the second execution environment, wherein the second execution environment decodes and executes the mobile agent, wherein the mobile agent uses the filtered set of canonical survival rules in the second execution environment.
  • 13. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the survival data is asserted into the working memory based at least in part on a state change of the mobile agent.
  • 14. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the survival data is asserted into the working memory based at least in part on a timer event in an execution environment of the computing device.
  • 15. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the set of canonical survival rules is specific to an execution environment of the computing device.
  • 16. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions to request a second set of canonical survival rules based upon the received request to move the mobile agent to a second execution environment.
  • 17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions to merge the second set of canonical survival rules with the first set of canonical survival rules.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED PATENT APPLICATIONS

This application is a Continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/645,198, filed Dec. 22, 2006, now abandoned, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

US Referenced Citations (211)
Number Name Date Kind
4714995 Materna et al. Dec 1987 A
5465111 Fukushima et al. Nov 1995 A
5495533 Linehan et al. Feb 1996 A
5524253 Pham et al. Jun 1996 A
5604800 Johnson et al. Feb 1997 A
5675711 Kephart et al. Oct 1997 A
5721912 Stepczyk et al. Feb 1998 A
5778395 Whiting et al. Jul 1998 A
5812997 Morimoto et al. Sep 1998 A
5859911 Angelo et al. Jan 1999 A
5930798 Lawler et al. Jul 1999 A
5982891 Ginter et al. Nov 1999 A
6038500 Weiss Mar 2000 A
6055562 Devarakonda et al. Apr 2000 A
6065040 Mima et al. May 2000 A
6088689 Kohn et al. Jul 2000 A
6113650 Sakai Sep 2000 A
6134580 Tahara et al. Oct 2000 A
6134660 Boneh et al. Oct 2000 A
6154777 Ebrahim Nov 2000 A
6172986 Watanuki et al. Jan 2001 B1
6199195 Goodwin et al. Mar 2001 B1
6202060 Tran Mar 2001 B1
6209124 Vermeire et al. Mar 2001 B1
6230309 Turner et al. May 2001 B1
6233601 Walsh May 2001 B1
6256773 Bowman-Amuah Jul 2001 B1
6272478 Obata et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282563 Yamamoto et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282697 Fables et al. Aug 2001 B1
6304556 Haas Oct 2001 B1
6330677 Madoukh Dec 2001 B1
6343265 Glebov et al. Jan 2002 B1
6349343 Foody et al. Feb 2002 B1
6389462 Cohen et al. May 2002 B1
6438744 Toutonghi et al. Aug 2002 B2
6442537 Karch Aug 2002 B1
6452910 Vij et al. Sep 2002 B1
6477372 Otting Nov 2002 B1
6496871 Jagannathan et al. Dec 2002 B1
6600430 Minagawa et al. Jul 2003 B2
6600975 Moriguchi et al. Jul 2003 B2
6611516 Pirkola et al. Aug 2003 B1
6629032 Akiyama Sep 2003 B2
6629128 Glass Sep 2003 B1
6662642 Breed et al. Dec 2003 B2
6671680 Iwamoto et al. Dec 2003 B1
6687761 Collins et al. Feb 2004 B1
6701381 Hearne et al. Mar 2004 B2
6714844 Dauner et al. Mar 2004 B1
6738975 Yee et al. May 2004 B1
6744352 Lesesky et al. Jun 2004 B2
6744358 Bollinger Jun 2004 B1
6744820 Khairallah et al. Jun 2004 B1
6768417 Kuragaki et al. Jul 2004 B2
6816452 Maehata Nov 2004 B1
6831375 Currie et al. Dec 2004 B1
6851108 Syme Feb 2005 B1
6862443 Witte Mar 2005 B2
6876845 Tabata et al. Apr 2005 B1
6879570 Choi Apr 2005 B1
6895391 Kausik May 2005 B1
6901588 Krapf et al. May 2005 B1
6904593 Fong et al. Jun 2005 B1
6931455 Glass Aug 2005 B1
6931623 Vermeire et al. Aug 2005 B2
6947965 Glass Sep 2005 B2
6951021 Bodwell et al. Sep 2005 B1
6957439 Lewallen Oct 2005 B1
6963582 Xu Nov 2005 B1
6981150 Little et al. Dec 2005 B2
6985929 Wilson et al. Jan 2006 B1
6993774 Glass Jan 2006 B1
7010689 Matyas, Jr. et al. Mar 2006 B1
7043522 Olson et al. May 2006 B2
7047518 Little et al. May 2006 B2
7055153 Beck et al. May 2006 B2
7058645 Seto et al. Jun 2006 B2
7062708 Mani et al. Jun 2006 B2
7069551 Fong et al. Jun 2006 B2
7127259 Ueda et al. Oct 2006 B2
7127724 Lewallen Oct 2006 B2
7146614 Nikols et al. Dec 2006 B1
7146618 Mein et al. Dec 2006 B1
7172113 Olenick et al. Feb 2007 B2
7174533 Boucher Feb 2007 B2
7197742 Arita et al. Mar 2007 B2
7210132 Rivard et al. Apr 2007 B2
7213227 Kompalli et al. May 2007 B2
7225425 Kompalli et al. May 2007 B2
7228141 Sethi Jun 2007 B2
7231403 Howitt et al. Jun 2007 B1
7237225 Kompalli et al. Jun 2007 B2
7293261 Anderson et al. Nov 2007 B1
7376959 Warshavsky et al. May 2008 B2
7475107 Maconi et al. Jan 2009 B2
7477897 Bye Jan 2009 B2
7496637 Han et al. Feb 2009 B2
7499990 Tai et al. Mar 2009 B1
7502615 Wilhoite et al. Mar 2009 B2
7506309 Schaefer Mar 2009 B2
7519455 Weiss Apr 2009 B2
7566002 Love et al. Jul 2009 B2
7643447 Watanuki et al. Jan 2010 B2
7660777 Hauser Feb 2010 B1
7660780 Patoskie Feb 2010 B1
7664721 Hauser Feb 2010 B1
7698243 Hauser Apr 2010 B1
7702602 Hauser Apr 2010 B1
7702603 Hauser Apr 2010 B1
7702604 Hauser Apr 2010 B1
7774789 Wheeler Aug 2010 B1
7810140 Lipari et al. Oct 2010 B1
7823169 Wheeler Oct 2010 B1
7840513 Hauser Nov 2010 B2
7844759 Cowin Nov 2010 B1
20010029526 Yokoyama et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010051515 Rygaard Dec 2001 A1
20010056425 Richard Dec 2001 A1
20020016912 Johnson Feb 2002 A1
20020032783 Tuatini Mar 2002 A1
20020035429 Banas Mar 2002 A1
20020091680 Hatzis et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020115445 Myllymaki Aug 2002 A1
20020116454 Dyla et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020159479 Watanuki et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020174222 Cox Nov 2002 A1
20020196771 Vij et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030009539 Hattori Jan 2003 A1
20030018950 Sparks et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030023573 Chan et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030033437 Fischer et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030046377 Daum et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030046432 Coleman et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030051172 Lordermann et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030055898 Yeager et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030070071 Riedel et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030101441 Harrison et al. May 2003 A1
20030177170 Glass Sep 2003 A1
20030191797 Gurevich et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030191969 Katsikas Oct 2003 A1
20030225789 Bussler et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030225935 Rivard et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040003243 Fehr et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015539 Alegria et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040037315 Delautre et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040044985 Kompalli et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040044986 Kompalli et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040044987 Kompalli et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040064503 Karakashian et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040078423 Satyavolu et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040078687 Partamian et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040082350 Chen et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040088369 Yeager et al. May 2004 A1
20040111730 Apte Jun 2004 A1
20040133656 Butterworth et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040148073 Hawig et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040153653 Abhyankar et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040172614 Gallagher Sep 2004 A1
20040194072 Venter Sep 2004 A1
20040203731 Chen et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040220952 Cheenath Nov 2004 A1
20040221292 Chiang et al. Nov 2004 A1
20050004727 Remboski et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050030202 Tsuboi Feb 2005 A1
20050090279 Witkowski et al. Apr 2005 A9
20050114832 Manu May 2005 A1
20050141706 Regli et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050144218 Heintz Jun 2005 A1
20050163549 Shima et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050172123 Carpenter et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050246302 Lorenz et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050256614 Habermas Nov 2005 A1
20050256876 Eidson Nov 2005 A1
20050262155 Kress et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050273668 Manning Dec 2005 A1
20050281363 Qi et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060005177 Atkin et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060031850 Falter et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060040640 Thompson et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060041337 Augsburger et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060048145 Celli et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060080646 Aman Apr 2006 A1
20060090103 Armstrong et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060111089 Winter et al. May 2006 A1
20060112183 Corson et al. May 2006 A1
20060121916 Aborn Jun 2006 A1
20060123396 Fox et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060143600 Cottrell et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060149746 Bansod et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060167981 Bansod et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060173857 Jackson Aug 2006 A1
20060190931 Scott et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060200494 Sparks Sep 2006 A1
20060206864 Shenfield et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060220900 Ceskutti et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060221901 Yaqub et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060245406 Shim Nov 2006 A1
20060256008 Rosenberg Nov 2006 A1
20060272002 Wightman et al. Nov 2006 A1
20070004432 Hwang et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070015495 Winter et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070026871 Wager Feb 2007 A1
20070103292 Burkley et al. May 2007 A1
20070112773 Joyce May 2007 A1
20070223432 Badarinath Sep 2007 A1
20070243880 Gits et al. Oct 2007 A1
20080077667 Hwang et al. Mar 2008 A1
20100161543 Hauser Jun 2010 A1
20100223210 Patoskie Sep 2010 A1
20100235459 Wheeler Sep 2010 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (1)
Number Date Country
2005190103 Jul 2005 JP
Non-Patent Literature Citations (129)
Entry
Bursell et al (“Comparison of autonomous mobile agent technologies” 1997).
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680 (Nov. 19, 2010), 17 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,197, (Nov. 29, 2010), 20 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 12/647,964 (Nov. 30, 2010),7 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 12/647,964, (Sep. 8, 2010), 5 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,827 (Sep. 15, 2010), 22 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,192, (Sep. 15, 2010),14 pages.
Erfurth, Christian et al., Migration Intelligence for Mobile Agents, (2001), 8 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,194 (Sep. 15, 2010),28 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,196, (Sep. 22, 2010), 33 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 12/714,753 (Sep. 27, 2010),7 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,197, (Oct. 6, 2010), 3 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,121 (Oct. 7, 2010),6 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,195, (Oct. 7, 2010), 8 pages.
Final Office Action, Application Oct. 21, 2010 ,34 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,191, (Oct. 28, 2010), 19 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,102 (Jul. 1, 2010), 14 pages.
Notice of Allowability, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,146 (Jul. 13, 2010),2 pages.
Rosenberg, Jonathan et al., “Programming Internet Telephony Services”, IEEE Network, (May/Jun. 1999), 8 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/439,059, (Jul. 14, 2010), 12 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,197 (Jul. 19, 2010), 16 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680, (Jul. 28, 2010), 3 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,303, (Jul. 28, 2010), 3 pages.
“The Sims”, Sims, Electranic Arts, (2000), 57 pages.
Taylor, TL “Does WoW Change Everything?”, Games and Culture, vol. 1, No. 4, (Oct. 2006), 20 pages.
Barba, Rick “The Sims Prima's Official Strategy Guide”, Prima Publishing: ISBN: 7615-2339-1 (2000),98 Pages.
Hinchey, Michael G., et al., “Formal Approaches to Agent-Based Systems”, 2nd International Workshop FAABS, (Oct. 2002),291 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,301 (Jul. 30, 2010), 18 pages.
Non Final Office Action, Application 11/1645,303, (Aug. 19, 2010), 20 pages.
Chang, Yao-Chung et al., “All-IP Convergent Communications over Open Service Architecture”, 2005 Wireless Telecommunications Symposium, IEEE, 0-7803-8856, (2005), pp. 202-210.
“WOW, World of Warcraft”, Wikipedia (online), Retrieved from Internet in 2010, <URL:htto:llen.wikioedia.orq/wiki/World of Warcraft> (2010), 28 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/495,053 (Aug. 31, 2010),7 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,120, (May 4, 2010), 3 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/495,053 (May 26, 2010),3 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,121, (Jun. 16, 2010), pp. 1-30.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,120 (Feb. 23, 2010),43 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/495,053, (Mar. 17, 2010), 17 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680 (May 17, 2010), 12 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,301 May 12, 2010), 32 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,303, May 21, 2010), 32 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,827 Mar. 25, 2010, 19 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/439,059, Mar. 26, 2010,6 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,191 (May 5, 2010), 17 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,192, May 4, 2010, 14 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,194, Mar. 26, 2010, 26 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,196, Apr. 28, 2010, 29 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,200 May 26, 2010, 34 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680, Feb. 4, 2010, 12 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,101 Sep. 2, 2009 ,20 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,102, Mar. 5, 2010 , 15 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,121 Dec. 30, 2009, 25 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/439,059, Oct. 30, 2009, 9 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/495,053 Jun. 10, 2009, 13 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,195, Apr. 15, 2010, 20 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,197 Feb. 24, 2010, 13 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,301, Jan. 6, 2010, 25 pages.
Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,303 Feb. 8, 2010, 18 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,623, Feb. 23, 2010), 9 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,101 Feb. 25, 2010), 9 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,292, Nov. 17, 2009, 9 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,300 Nov. 18, 2009, 9 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,302, Nov. 17, 2009, 8 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,306 Nov. 17, 2009, 8 pages.
Restriction Requirement, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,191, Jan. 28, 2010, 7 pages.
Restriction Requirement, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,192 Jan. 28, 2010 ,6 pages.
Restriction Requirement, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,200, Feb. 26, 2010 ,8 pages.
Bagci, et al., “Communication and Security Extensions for a Ubiquitous Mobile Agent System (UbiMAS)”, In Proceedings of CF 2005, Available at <http://portal.acm.orgIft—gateway.cfm?id=1062302&type=pdf&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=91857573&CFTOKEN=53726080>,(May 2005), pp. 246-251.
Brandt, Raimund “Dynamic Adaptation of Mobile Code in Heterogenous Environments”, Der Teschnischen Universitat Munchen,(Feb. 15, 2001), 76 pages.
Brazier, F.M.T. et al., “Generative Migration of Agents”, Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; de Boelelaan 1081 a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands {frances, bjo, steen, niek} @cs.vu.l,(Aug. 2002), 4 pages.
Christopoulou, Eleni et al., “An ontology-based context management and reasoning process for UbiComp applications”, Research Academie Computer Technology Institute, Research Unit 3, Design of Ambient Information Systems Group, N. Kazantzaki str., Rio Campus, 26500, Patras, Greece {hristope, goumop, kameas} @cti.qr,(Oct. 2005), 6 pages.
Hasegawa, Tetsou et al., “Inoperability for mobile agents by incarnation agents”, AAMAS; Melbourne, Australia; ACM, 1-58113-683, pp. 1006-1007,(Jul. 14, 2003), 2 pages.
Jih, Wan-Rong et al., “Context-aware Access Control in Pervasive Healthcare”, Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taiwan jih@agents.csie.ntu.edu.tw., {r93070, yjhsu} @csie.ntu.edu.tw,(2005), 8 pages.
Karnik, Neeran M., et al., “Security in the Ajanta Mobile Agent System”, Softw. Pract. Exper. 31, 4 (Apr. 2001), 301-329,(2001), 28 pages.
Korba, Larry “Towards Secure Agent Distribution and Communication”, In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Science—vol. 8 (Jan. 5-8, 1999). HICSS. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 8059.,(1999), 10 pages.
Pauline, Siu Po Lam “Context-Aware State Management for Supporting Mobility in a Pervasive Environment”, A thesis submitted to the University of Hong Kong in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Philosophy.,(Aug. 2004), 106 pages.
Poggi, Agostino et al., “Security and Trust in Agent-Oriented Middleware”, OTM Workshops 2003: 989-1003,(2003), 15 pages.
Qui-Sheng, He et al., “A Lightweight Architecture to Support Context-Aware Ubiquitous Agent System”, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, Chain {hequisheng, situ} @fudan.edu.cn,(Aug. 2006), 6 pages.
Walsh, Tom et al., “Security and Reliability in Concordia”, In Mobility: Processes, Computers, and Agents ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., New York, NY, 524-534.,(1999), 10 pages.
Yu, Ping et al., “Mobile Agent Enabled Application Mobility for Pervasive Computing”, Internet and Mobile Computing Lab, Department of Computing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong {cspyu, csjcao, cswen} @comp.polyu.edu.hk.,(OS/2006), 10 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,623, (Nov. 12, 2009), 8 pages.
Blackwell, John “Ramit—Rule-Based Alert Management Information Tool”, Thesis Florida State University College of Arts and Sciences (2004), pp. 1-69.
FORTE, “Feature Comparison of Agent and Free Agent”, Retrieved from: <www.forteinc.com/agent/features.php> on Jan. 26, 2010 (2002),3 pages.
Lockemann, Peter C., “Agents and Databases: Friends or Foes?”, Proceedings of the 9th International Database Engineering & Application Symposium (IDEAS '05), (2005), 11 pages.
Russell, Stuart et al., “Artificial intelligence: A Modern Approach”, Pearson, (2003), pp. 5, 32-56, 449-454.
Stallings, William “ISDN and Broadband ISDN with Framw Relay and ATM”, Prentice-Hall, (1999), p. 516.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,102 (Oct. 20, 2009), 13 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,827, (Nov. 23, 2009), 17 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,146 (Dec. 1, 2009), 11 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,120 (Aug. 13, 2009),35 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,121, (Sep. 11, 2009), 3 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,190 (Sep. 17, 2009),8 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,193, (Sep. 17, 2009), 8 pages.
Advisory Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,121 (Sep. 11, 2009),3 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,211, (Sep. 29, 2009), 18 pages.
Praset, et al., “Processor Modeling and Code Selection for Retargetable Compilation”, Jul. 2001 ACM TODAES vol. 6 Issue 3 (Jul. 2001), pp. 277-307.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,291 (Oct. 1, 2009), 11 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680, (Oct. 5, 2009), 16 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,102, (Jun. 2, 2009), 18 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,306, (Jun. 4, 2009), 19 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,623, (Jun. 9, 2009), 6 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,121, (Jun. 22, 2009), 32 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,211, 25 pages.
Requirement for Restriction/Election, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,102, (Apr. 6, 2009), 7 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,827, (Apr. 7, 2009), 38 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,120, (Apr. 14, 2009), 48 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,292, (Apr. 17, 2009), 40 pages.
Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680 (Feb. 13, 2009), 117 pages.
Flanagan, Roxy “Graphic + Internet related tutorials Using Winzip”, indexed by www.archive.org,(Oct. 30, 2008),8 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,190, (Mar. 13, 2009), 41 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,291, (Mar. 13, 2009), 41 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,193, (Mar. 16, 2009), 41 pages.
Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 11/086,101, (Mar. 23, 2009),20 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/052,680, (May 6, 2009),28 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,300, (May 11, 2009), 21 pages.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,302, (May 11, 2009), 21 pages.
“Stuffit Deluxe”, Aladdin Systems,(Jan. 1, 2004), 83 pages.
Gu, T. et al., “Toward an OSGi-based infrastructure for context-aware applications”, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,190, Pervasive Computing IEEE, vol. 3, Issue 4. Digital abject Identifier 10.11 09/MPRV.2004.19,(Oct.-Dec. 2004), 9 pages.
Pantic, M et al., “Simple agent framework: an educational tool introducing the basics of AI programming”, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,190, Information Technology: Research and Education, 2003. Proceedings. ITRE2003.,(Aug. 11-13, 2003), 426-430.
Singh, V.K. et al., “DYSWIS: An architecture for automated diagnosis of networks”, U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,190, Operations and Management Symposium, 2008. NOMS 2008. IEEE,(Apr. 7-11, 2008), 851-854.
Non Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 10/975,146, (May 26, 2009), 21 pages.
Emmerich, et al., “TIGRA—An Architectural Style for Enterprise Application Integration”, IEEE, (Jul. 2001), p. 567-576.
Bussler, Christoph “The Role of B2B Engines in B2B Integration Architectures”, ACM, (Mar. 2002), 67-72.
Jandl, et al., “Enterprise Application Integration by means of a generic CORBA LDAP Gateway”, ACM, (May 2002), 711.
Sutherland, et al., “Enterprise Application Integration and Complex Adaptive Systems”, ACM, (Oct. 2002), 59-64.
Ballance, et al., “The Pan Language-Based Editing System for Integrated Development Environments”, ACM, (Oct. 1990), 77-93.
Dilts, et al., “An Inteligent Interface to CIM Multiple Data Bases”, ACM, TALIP, (Mar. 2004),vol. 3 Issue 1, pp. 491-509.
Shiao, Dan, “Mobile Agent: New Model of Intelligent Distributed Computing Part One” Oct. 2004.
Final Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,198, mailed Nov. 8, 2011.
Non-Final Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 11/645,198, mailed Jul. 22, 2011.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20120185826 A1 Jul 2012 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 11645198 Dec 2006 US
Child 13429785 US