Seminar rules

For passing the seminar, each student must

• write a 10-12 page paper (single column style with separate title page like we use for thesis work), using the proper academic style and good quality research publications; in two weeks of the seminar start, get your abstract accepted (requires a short meeting beforehand to discuss the contents (and getting suggestions for additional references and support like that);
• give a presentation of 40 mins on that topic, supported by slides, and structuring the talk appropriatelly for a verbal presentation;
• participate the discussion after each presentation;
• provide feedback for the presentations and papers of other group members.

Requirements of being present in sessions:  You should attend and actively participate the discussion at each paper. However, in cases of illness or other pressing situations, inform me about your absence beforehand. You can pass the seminar if you have been present at 2/3 of the presentations. If your case is complicated, please come and discuss that with me as soon as you know of the difficulty.

Participants, topics and peer-review groups

Topics

Below some initial topic ideas; other topics will be taken under consideration as well. 

Currently these topic ideas have been expressed using wordings that closely match to a single article, for ease of finding initial references.  However, as seminar paper titles they need to be modified for better match the actual seminar paper scope. 

Basic building patterns for interoperability management

1. Ontologies, definition languages and tools
2. Reflective system overview
3. Multi-agent system overview

Levels of interoperability

1. Cultural interoperability / Organisational interoperability
2. Semantic interoperability approaches, such as 

• ​​Semantic web (focusing especially on ontology aspects)
• Interactive semantics

Building interoperable systems

1. Metadata interoperability
2. Modeling tool interoperability
3. Negotiation framework for monitoring the sustainability of interoperability solutions

Operational time interoperability management

1. On-the-Fly Interoperability through Automated Mediator Synthesis and Monitoring

Case studies on networked business situations where interoperability management is involved

1. Case: Knowledge-based system for collaborative process specification
2. Case: Adaptive medical workflow
3. Case: Rule-based ontological knowledge base for monitoring partners across supply networks
4. Case: Sharing knowledge in a supply chain using the semantic web

Participants

• Asena, Dawit
• Bashyam, Anusuya
• Hosiaisluoma, Eero
• Kallio, Petri
• Reiman, Tomi
• Tiemuer, Aikeremu
• Yan, Yishu

Peer-review groups

During the first period we focus mostly on producing the paper, and have the presentations on the second period. In the end of the first period, the papers need to be ready, and they will be reviewed by the seminar leader and the peer student group. After that, a week or so will be granted for corrections based on the feedback.

The peer review group should be large enough to allow each paper to be commented by two students, at least. Preferrably these two peers have themselves a topic in the same topic group above, or otherwise near in themes. The first topic group differs from this principle.

The topic groups above try to follow a pedagogically meaningful order of presentation.

Schedule

• 14.1. 2014 - 28.1.2014 in D221​
  • ​Opening session: i) Working methods in the seminar ii) Short discussion of the topic domain
  • Compulsory reading for all group members disregard of the topic they present:
    • M. Papazoglou, P. Traverso, S.Dustdar, F. Leymann: Service-Oriented Computing: a Research Roadmap. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 17(2): 223-255 (2008)
• 21.1. 2014 - 28.1.2014 in D221​
  • ​Individual appointments for seminar paper work plan, use cinco.flock  google calendar for reserving a time
• 28.1. 2014 at 14-16 in C220 Handing in and presenting plans
  • 1) A round of seminar work plan presentations (2-5 mins)​
  • 2) Discussion of the expected structure and elements of the paper (in terms of subject matters) and how to create a good verbal presentatio
  • checklist for your plan presentation (you also need to hand in your plan in writing (pdf by email):
    • what is your work title (narrow it down now)
    • what kind of models are in focus and what role they have in the system you discuss
    • what  are the information moves in your paper (what you intend to describe)
    • what are the analytical/evaluative/comparative/case study aspects that will be present in your paper
  • Information about preparing academic texts and presentations can be found at (in Finnish: http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/courses/582204/2012/s/k/1 on Batchelor thesis), https://www.cs.helsinki.fi/i/summanen/teaching/thesis-seminar-2011/4-presentations.pdf on giving presentations and http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/courses/582517/2011/s/k/1 on Orientation to MSc studies where scientific writing was in major role  and http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/courses/58308307/2011/S/S/1 on writing MSc thesis.
  • Some slides on https://www.cs.helsinki.fi/i/summanen/teaching/seminar-EI-trends-2013/researchprocess-and-thesis.pdf
• 4.2.2014 at 13-15 in (please note the time and place!) D221 available for individual comments on completing your papers
  • ​use the calendar for forming a queue if necessary - other times that week applicable too
• 11.2.2014 by midnight Send in your full paper for peer review to your peer review group
  • Peer review process: In both peer groups you read and comment the other students' papers and likewise receive from them their review comments for improving your paper. Of course, you will get my comments as well. Send review comments to the author of the paper and me latest on Monday morning (7.10) so they can be read before the discussion session. ​
  • Paper submissions by email list; a request for submitting your papers will be sent to your email address before 11.2 so you can simply answer to that request by including all of us as recipients. Make sure you do not rely me to forward your papers to other group members but do that directly. It is also more comfortable to see all of the papers instead of just two of them.
  • Peer groups are as follows:
    • ​
      

      a) Hosiaisluoma (EA), Asena (cultural interop), Reiman (case on ontology building)
      b) Kallio (ESB), Yan (MAS for SOC), Tiemuer ()

• 18.2.2014 at 14-16 in C220  No meeting / Session for discussing the peer review results ? 
  • ​14-15 only; some of the papers have been out at the deadline and their comments can be discussed
  • • ​Process: In the review grops discuss the strong points and suggestions of each paper in turn. The author of the paper should just hear (and ask questions for understanding), not defend or explain why something was done the way it was or was not yet done. This step of active listening without defences is not only saving time but essential for any feedback process being effective in terms of having effects on the work quality and learning for the future.
• 25.2.2014 at 14-16 in C220 No meeting / Session for discussing the peer review results ?
  • ​14-15 only; repeat 18.2 program for the remaining papers
• 4.3.2014 at 14-16 in C220  No meeting
• 11.3.2014 at 14-16 in C220 Final paper deadline 
  • ​MSc thesis presentation by K. Eklund (text to be circulated a week beforehand);
  • This is brought to you as there is space for it and we currently have no NODES thesis seminar running; your turn will be one day!
• 18.3.2014 at 14-16 in C220 Presentations
  • ​Petri Kallio
  • the paper will be circulated a bit delayed
  • all papers will become available in this directory
• 25.3.2014 at 14-16 in C220  Presentations
  • ​Yishu Yan
• 1.4.2014 at 14-16 in C220  Presentations
  • Eero Hosiaisluoma
• 8.4.2014 at 14-16 in C220  Presentations​
  • ​Dawit Asena
• 15.4.2014 at 14-16 in C220  Presentations
  • ​Aikeremu Tiemuer
• 22.4.2014 at 14-16 in C220  Presentations
  • ​Tomi Reiman

Material suggestions to get started

• Mizoguchi, Riichiro. "Tutorial on ontological engineering part 2: Ontology development, tools and languages." New Generation Computing 22.1 (2004): 61-96.
• Malenfant, Jacques, Marco Jacques, and Franois Nicolas Demers. "A tutorial on behavioral reflection and its implementation." Proceedings of the Reflection. Vol. 96. 1996.
• Kon, Fabio, et al. "The case for reflective middleware." Communications of the ACM 45.6 (2002): 33-38.
• Katia Sycara, Multiagent systems. AI Magazine Volume 19 Number 2 (1998) (© AAAI)

• Lawrence E. Whitman, Hervé Panetto, The missing link: Culture and language barriers to interoperability, Annual Reviews in Control, Volume 30, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 233-241, ISSN 1367-5788, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2006.09.008.

• Koussouris, Sotirios, et al. "Digging into the real-life enterprise interoperability areas definition and overview of the main research areas." Proceedings of CENT (2011): 19-22.
• Georg Weichhart *, Thomas Feiner, Chris Stary, Implementing organisational interoperability—The SUddEN approach. Computers in Industry 61 (2010) 152–160.
• Franc¸ois B. Vernadat, Technical, semantic and organizational issues of enterprise interoperability and networking. Annual Reviews in Control 34 (2010) 139–144.
• Claudio Gutierrez , Carlos A. Hurtadob, Alberto O. Mendelzon , Jorge Pérez, Foundations of Semantic Web databases. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 77 (2011) 520–541
• Jim Hendler, Tim Berners-Lee, From the Semantic Web to social machines: A research challenge for AI on the World Wide Web. Artificial Intelligence 174 (2010) 156–161.
• Hai Zhuge, Interactive semantics. Artificial Intelligence 174 (2010) 190–204.
• Jean Bézivin, Hugo Brunelière, Jordi Cabot, Guillaume Doux, Frédéric Jouault, Jean-Sébastien Sottet, Model Driven Tool Interoperability in Practice. Author manuscript, published in "3rd Workshop on Model-Driven Tool & Process Integration (co-located with ECMFA 2010),
• Haslhofer,B. and Klas,W. 2010.Asurvey of techniques for achieving metadata interoperability.ACMComput.Surv. 42, 2, Article 7 (February 2010), 37 pages.
  DOI = 10.1145/1667062.1667064. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1667062.1667064
• Coutinho, Carlos, Adina Cretan, and Ricardo Jardim-Goncalves. "Negotiations Framework for Monitoring the Sustainability of Interoperability Solutions."Enterprise Interoperability. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012. 172-184.
• Bertolino, Antonia, et al. "On-the-fly interoperability through automated mediator synthesis and monitoring." Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification, and Validation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. 251-262.
• Rajsiri, Vatcharaphun, et al. "Knowledge-based system for collaborative process specification." Computers in Industry 61.2 (2010): 161-175.
• Dang, Jiangbo, et al. "An ontological knowledge framework for adaptive medical workflow." Journal of biomedical informatics 41.5 (2008): 829-836.
• Chi, Yu-Liang. "Rule-based ontological knowledge base for monitoring partners across supply networks." Expert Systems with Applications 37.2 (2010): 1400-1407.
• Huang, Chun-Che, and Shian-Hua Lin. "Sharing knowledge in a supply chain using the semantic web." Expert Systems with Applications 37.4 (2010): 3145-3161.