Blackboard approach in design planning for concurrent engineering environment

Cybernetics and Systems

Volumn 29, Issue 7, 1998, Pages 729-750

  Reidsema, C ^a   Szczerbicki, E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; CONCURRENT ENGINEERING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; DECISION MAKING;

BLACKBOARD-BASED DESIGN PLANNING MODEL;

EXPERT SYSTEMS;

EID: 0032188058     PISSN: 01969722     EISSN: 10876553     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/019697298125506     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Allen, J., J. Hendler, and A. Tate. 1990. Readings in Planning. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
2. Balasubramanian, S. and D. H. Norrie. 1996. A Multiagent Architecture for Concurrent Design, Process Planning, Routing, and Scheduling. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications. 4:7 —16.
3. Buschmann, F., R. Meunier, H. Rohnert, P. Sommerlad, and M. Stal. 1996. Pattern-Oriented Software Architecture: A System of Patterns. New York: John Wiley &Sons.
4. Craig, I. D. 1993. A New Interpretation of the Blackboard Metaphor. Technical Report No. CS-RR-254, Department of Computer Science, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK. http: // docs.dcs.napier.ac.uk/DOCS/GET/alexander-craig93a/document.html.
5. Eppinger, S. D. 1991. Model-based approaches to managing concurrent engineering. J. Engrg. Design. 2:283-290.
6. Evans, M. and J. Anderson. 1990. Constraint-directed intelligent control in multi-agent problem solving. In AI, Simulation, and Planning in High Autonomy Systems, eds. B. Zeigler and J. Rosenbilt, 42-50. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
7. Fiegenbaum, E. A. and J. Feldman. 1963. Computers and Thought. New York: McGraw - Hill.
8. Hayes-Roth, B. 1985. A blackboard architecture for control. Artif. In tell. 26:251 - 321.
9. Hayes-Roth, B. and F. Hayes-Roth. 1979. A cognitive model of planning. In Readings in Planning, eds. J. Allen, J. Hendler, and A. Tate, 245-262. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
10. Hayes-Roth, B., F. Hayes-Roth, F. Rosenschein, and S. Cammarata. 1979. Modelling planning as an incremental, opportunistic process. In Proc. 6th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 375—383. Los Altos, CA: William Kaufmann.
11. Korf, R. E. 1986. Planning as search: A quantitative approach. In Readings in Planning, eds. James Allen, James Hendler, and Austin Tate, 566-577. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
12. Kruth, J-P., G. Van Zeir, and J. Detand. 1996. An interactive CAPP kernel based on a blackboard system architecture. In Proc. 1996 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers in Engineering Conference, August 18-22, 1 -13. Irvine, Calif.
13. Kusiak, A. and K. Park. 1990. Concurrent engineering: Decomposition and scheduling of design activities. Internat. J. Production Research. 28:1883-1900.
14. Kusiak, A. and J. Wang. 1993. Decomposition of the design process. J. Mech. Design. 115:687-695.
15. Lander, S. E., D. D. Corkill, and S. M. Staley. 1996. Designing integrated engineering environments: Blackboard-based integration of design and analysis tools. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications. 4:59—71.
16. Lecluse, D. and E. Sleeckx. 1993. An integrated design support system for mechanical applications. In Proc. 7th Internat. Conference on System Research Inform atics and Cybernetics.
17. MacCallum, K. J. and I. M. Carter. 1992. Opportunistic software architecture for support of design coordination. Knowledge-Based Systems. 5:55-65.
18. Molina, A., A. H. Al-Ashaab, T. I. A. Ellis, R. I. M. Young, and R. Bell. 1995. A review of computer-aided simultaneous engineering systems. Res. Engrg. Design. 7:38-63.
19. Muller, J. P. 1996. The Design of Intelligent Agents—A Layered Approach, 32. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
20. Nii, H. P. 1986. Blackboard systems: The blackboard model of problem solving and the evolution of blackboard architectures. The AI Magazine. Summer:38 -10.
21. Parsaei, H. R. and W. G. Sullivan. 1993. Concurrent Engineering: Contemporary Issues and Modern Design Tools. New York: Chapman &Hall.
22. Prasad, B. 1996. Concurrent Engineering Fundamentals: Integrated Product Development, Volume II. New York: Prentice Hall.
23. Rao, M., Q. Wand, and J. Zhou. 1996. Integrated Distributed Intelligent Systems for Engineering Design. New York: Gordon and Breach Publishers.
24. Reidsema, C. and E. Szczerbicki. 1997a. Multi-agent systems for concurrent engineering. Systems Analysis, Modelling, Simulation, Vol. 28, pp. 257-279.
25. Reidsema, C. and E. Szczerbicki. 1997b. Towards a system for design planning in a concurrent engineering environment, Systems Anal. Modelling Simulation. 29:301 -320.
26. Sim, S-K. and A. H. B. Duffy. 1994. Validating design models/theories. In Workshop on the Nature and Role of Theory in AI in Design Research, Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Design, Lausanne, Switzerland, August 1994, 1 -7.
27. Sprague, Jr., R. H. 1980. A framework for the development of decision support systems, MIS Quarterly. 4:7-31.
28. Tebay, R. and J. A. S. H. Wearne. 1984. Mechanical engineering design decisions: Instances of practice compared with theory. In Proc. Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 198B.
29. Wang, N., D. Fagan, and S. Staley. 1993. A blackboard system for vehicle suspension tuning. In Proc. 19th Design Automation Conference, ASME, DE-65:397 -409.
30. Young, R. E., A. Greef, and P. O’Grady. 1992. An artificial intelligence-based constraint network system for concurrent engineering. Internat. J Production Research. 30:1715 —1735.