Mark's summary of our discussion
Simen's visualization
Visualization can cover everything from the model of policy in terms
of graphs and promises to data observed and measured as consequences
of those choices. Therefore we should combine models from reliability
theory (fault/cause trees) with time series models and anomaly detectors,
logging engines and controllers.
Tie this to a cfengine user base. Combine a policy-based view of
visualization with a control interface for setting policy? A good idea
is the build the research around a prototype that will run on
Unix and Windows. Then people (esp cfenigne users) will start to use
this and we will get a whole bunch of feedback from real users.
Policy-based visualization means being able to decide how events and
states are visualized, so as to maximize the comprehensibilty of the
data. Here are some ideas for visualizing complx data.
1. Tunnel vision (3d tunnel - curvature and walls and floor are paramters)
2. Fish eye vision (retinax)
3. Syslog with multimedia objects
In terms of abstractions, we want to attach multimedia representations to:
1. Discrete (graphs, events)
2. Continuum inputs (time series etc)
Siri + Kyrre overlap project
The only example of autonomous agents that is currently in widespread
use is BGP. Make a promise and Maude simulation of BGP. How do
promises get amde in Maude?
Game payoff - how does it fit in?
Payoff is a subjective function of the measurements.
There is an analogy with routing
- Metrics (or utility factor for decision-making)
- Policy (bgp)
OSPF etc are like legacy systems that simply assume cooperation
tacitly. As a result they do not scale well etc. Compare how OSPF and
RIP networks look in terms of promises. RIP only promises its nearest
neighbours. OSPF promises to listen to any flooded message.
Maud is a realization of the policy ideas that is more concrete than
Event Calculus?? We should look at this other work by people in London
using temporal logics and try to relate it.
Kyrre and Siri should formulate a version of promises in Maude
language so we can explain our work to the Oslo group in their
own language.
Promises can be viewed as logic, but the are also a stepping stone to
methods of approximation. e.g. a promise may be subject to noise and
fluctuations from the environment, thus, while the ideas might be
logically consistent in spirit, the details could fall short of this
idea.
How do our projects fit into the magix goals? We want to make a
Maude/promise presentation for the MAGIX/Promise workshop, and also to
engage a discussion with UiO.. This is about networking and about
policy.
| 
