Talk:SORCER/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

notability and sourcing

Worthwhile reading — WP:42 is the answer to most questions about new articles, in the wikiverse (gratitude to TRPoD for this link). Summary of the sources-list below is basically....

1. DoD, the multiyear multi-million-dollar supergrants by the USAF+NIST and NSFChina (plus hints of Ulyanovsk) ... and the classified weaponized-aerospace work these indicate. Such work is not useful as RS now, today, because WP:V demands the info be *published* aka available to the public... and wikiLeaks doesn't count as RS methinks... or does it? Hmmmm. Point is, this stuffwill be declassified someday. And it exists now, today. We cannot *use* it today, for sourcing the article, but that doesn't mean we have to pretend this set of classified sources, published-yet-top-secret, doesn't exist — when evaluating the public sources below, it can lend some perspective to what they don't say.
2. UK, the 2007 U.Cranfield lit-review & industry-survey (a solid secondary source), plus the 2009 G.Goteng PhD from same place. WP:SOURCES sez, "academic peer-reviewed pub's are usu the most RS". WP:SCHOLARSHIP sez, "PhD [theses]...can be used but care should be exercised".
3. RU, the 2007/YYYY/2013 newspaper articles in Russian (I've asked somebody who "can read a few words of Russian" to give us rough assessment of depth... anybody amongst us here know Cyrillic?)
4. ZH, the 2010 PhD and 3+ peer-reviewed journal articles by Nan Li (most of the work in Chinese but that is no hindrance to wikiNotability though it is a barrier to gauging depth... Clover1991 of DUROMAC fame has offered to help us with translating the mandarin if kazumo is busy), plus the 2011 and 2013 Beijing Jiaotong University PhD (students of Nan methinks?); *maybe* the ZH edu-news section; additional evidence, tho not themselves RS, are the two Master's theses. Again WP:SOURCES and WP:SCHOLARSHIP
5. US, the 2013 iosPress/AFRL papers (peer-reviewed by the 20 members of the conf-board and the 3 members of the editorial-subset which were mostly Aussies), plus the 2012 DaytonThesis PhD (which has a public-domain chapter on SORCER beginning on page 230... decent tone... might be the best place to start on the rewrite of mainspace?); additional evidence, tho not itself RS, is the WrightState Master's. SorcerDotCom in Poland, and SorcerSoftDotOrg at TTU in Texas, are the entities directly responsible for SORCER; the USAF and WPAFB are funding Prof.Sobolewski, U.Dayton, WrightSt.U, and various other stuff via the MSTC/AFRL folks in Ohio.

Meanwhile, as Tim and ScopeCreep and TRPoD and Garamond and others are analyzing whether this list of sources is bulletproof wikiNotability, safe from all future deletion-attempts, Pawelpacewicz and Martijn and Prubach and myself can try to start working on WP:TONE, and on clearly explaining the meaning of SORCER/nsh/exertions/mograms/SOOA/COLA/PEPSI/7UP/etc to the readership.

Fiddle Faddle's suggestion "that the first task is to show and prove notability though" ... there is one, and only one, way to prove wikiNotability. That is, namely, to find multiple independent Reliable Sources, which cover SORCER itself (specifically), in some amount of depth. Finding good sources, and proving wikiNotability, are the same thing. Nothing more is required, but also, nothing less is required. There is a difference between a *secondary* source, and an *independent* source. If anyone finds independent sources, fact-checked by an independent journalist's professional editorial board, or peer-reviewed by independent referees at some journal's science-board, please add them to the list below. Thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

The second AfD ended well, with a 'keep' rather than the wishy-washy 'no consensus' that we had the first time. That doesn't mean we are done organizing sources, however! It is important for wikipedia to reflect wat the wikiReliable Sources say, see WP:UNDUE. So please, keep adding sources to this listing, appropriately categorized, as you find them. Thanks for improving wikipedia, it's appreciated. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

---

PLEASE EDIT THESE SOURCE-EVALUATIONS DIRECTLY, TO FILL IN MISSING DETAILS. Thanks much.  :-)  74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

some WP:ABOUTSELF sources

Mwsobol#0 sorcersoft.com (or maybe sorcer.com ??), company to market GUI systems built on top of open-source code from sorcersoft.org below, in Poland where Mwsobol teaches at PJIT Mwsobol#1 url == http://sorcersoft.org/publications/papers/2012/6.2012-5520.pdf title == "Efficient Supersonic Air Vehicle Analysis and Optimization Implementation using SORCER" collaborative university == Texas Tech University 2002-2009 , spun off as of 2010 into an open source project

AFRL / IOSPRESS x2 or x3

Shortname == iosPress#1 (there is also another one by the same author/publisher... I will add that later on).done Suggested as WP:RS to satisfy WP:NOTE. title == Physics-Based Distributed Collaborative Design for Aerospace Vehicle Development and Technology Assessment pages == 198-215 url == http://ebooks.iospress.nl/publication/34808 author == Raymond M. Kolonay possibly conflict == Director of MSTC/AFRL, an organization that is an enduser of Sorcer. Pawelpacewicz is of the opinion that therefore no COI exists; however, methinks AFRL is not just an enduser, but also the collaborator-slash-employer-slash-funder of the SORCER work (Professor Sobolewski among others... who is currently "Director of SORCER Lab in collab with AFRL/WPAFB and PL-JP Inst of IT"[1]), so this is somewhat of a grey area, Kolonay is a collaborator in SORCER research as well as an enduser... AFRL isn't just a typical customer in other words, cf the early history of Jeep vehicles during WWII. Background: the USAF is using Sorcer in their (aerospace-research) environment, and developing computational models to address the physics-based distributed collaborative design (i.e. aerospace-design-engineers using local exertion-scripts implemented via SORCER as the substrate-platform) for aerospace vehicle development. summary == One AFRL mission is to develop (and assess!) next-generation aerospace-system technologies i.e. fighters/bombers/missiles/etc. Currently, due to time/personnel/funding constraints, the tech-assessment work is traditionally achieved using empirical relationships and historical data associated with systems developed previously (i.e. earlier-generation fighters/bombers/missiles/etc)... this approach is fast, but not necessarily accurate, especially when neither empirical nor historical info exists! (The first version of a radical new bomber-design for instance.) Inaccurate assessment leads to poor USAF decisions about investment into future aerospace-systems. AFRL has an AerospaceSystemsDirectorate with the MultidisciplinaryScienceAndTechnologyCenter; these MSTC folks are under the author Kolonay. This group is creating tech-assessment-and-design-exploration apps/methods/processes, which are physics-based (the tech-assessment depends on weight/lift/drag/etc ... as opposed to historical data from wind tunnels and combat engagements and such ... whereas weight/lift/drag are known at CAD-design-time without needing to build a physical prototype). The aerospace-designers who work elsewhere in the USAF can work on their CAD-based designs, run SORCER-based apps that perform tech-assessment, and get quantitative estimates of cost/strength/firepower/etc (aka affordability/survivability/lethality/sustainability), which are the things USAF leadership && Congress uses to make funding-decisions. Basically, given merely an AutoCAD diagram of a radical new bomber-design, the MSTC tech-assessment app usesSORCER (how specifically?) to predict the quantitative real-world manufacturingCost/offensiveCombat/defensiveCombat/etc performance-characteristics of the hypothetical bomber, partly by running mission-simulations of various bomber-configs (different fuel-load crew-size weapon-selection whatnot). The new MSTC tech-assessment app takes the same amount of time as traditional tech-assessment. Aerospace-designers get a quantifiable usefulness-prediction-metric, repeated each time they incrementally adjust their CAD-design, and USAF leadership (and taxpayers) get better decision-making about funding for new aerospace-systems. publisher == iospress.nl was publication peer-reviewed aka refereed == Yes. By the conference board (see full list of 19-besides-Sobolewski in comment-section). Here you have the information about the committee: (https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/20th-ispe-international-conference-concurrent-engineering/committee-information), And here you can find confirmation (at the bottom) that according to the rules of the conference proceedings each paper has to be peer reviewed: https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/20th-ispe-international-conference-concurrent-engineering/presenter-information IOS Press confirms as well their peer-review process here:http://www.iospress.nl/service/authors/open-library-ios-press-open-access-option/ Here You have another organization which is using peer-review process by IOS Press: http://www.oapen.org/peerreview?page=ios url of iospress editorial board == Cees Bil, John Mo, Josip Stjepandić - You can find it on their page:http://ebooks.iospress.nl/book/20th-ispe-international-conference-on-concurrent-engineering is publisher independent == If I understand well your intention (correct), you would like to check if they are independent from authors-or-the-employers-of-authors of the SORCER work (correct). In my opinion the proof for this type of independency is the information on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_Press) which shows that it was established 26 years ago, and that they are publishing approximately 90 international journals and releases and about 130 booktitles annually. (74 agrees with Pawelpacewicz... IOS press is not run by USAF nor any of the SORCER folks, but is an independent scientific publisher... however, interestingly enough, IOS Press does *not* provide their own professional editorial board, but rather, uses a subset of the peer-reviewers as their editors.) As such they’re not dependent from the author (correct) or any of the institutions for which the author works or had worked previously. (correct) is publisher a vanity press == Pawelpacewicz says: as an independent publisher of peer-reviewed scientific journal the publisher definitely doesn’t accept paid-for papers. 74 says, this seems to be mostly true. In fact the folks at IOS Press *do* require payment up front, as you can see in the link Pawelpacewicz provides, to the tune of a thousand euros per paper published. However, this is the business model of the publisher... they do not charge subscription-fees to the recipients of the papers (which is why wikipedians can see the full paper sans any paywall — the license is even Creative Commons of some sort). <grin> All papers that IOS Press publishes this way are from peer-reviewed scientific conferences (in this case the 20th ISPE ICCE), and the editorial board is also from academia slash industry (in this case RMIT*2 plus a firm in Germany). IOS is a member of STM, which also includes AAAS / ACS / AIP / AMS / AMA / APS ... that was just the first few which jumped out at me.  :-)   Seems legit; wikipedia already has about 20 computing-articles which cite iospress, plus about 20 medical-articles. was book printed, or ebook only == both: http://www.iospress.nl/book/20th-ispe-international-conference-on-concurrent-engineering/ date == if you click on the link right to “Ebook” You will go to page: http://ebooks.iospress.nl/book/20th-ispe-international-conference-on-concurrent-engineering and there is info that it was published in 2013 Shortname == iosPress#2 (Mwsobol#2) url == http://ebooks.iospress.nl/publication/34826 (here is the TOC[2] for the proceedings) title == Parametric Mogramming with Var-Oriented Modeling and Exertion-Oriented Programming Languages authors == Michael Sobolewski / Scott Burton / Raymond Kolonay author homes == SORCER Soft / ((unknown)) / MTSC of AFRL editors == Cees Bil / John Mo / Josip Stjepandić editor homes == RMIT University Australia / RMIT University Australia / PROSTEP AG Germany editorial review == 2013 Proceedings of the 20th ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering; 978-1-61499-301-8 (print) | 978-1-61499-302-5 (online) peer review == 20th ISPE ICCE board (see list of twenty in the comments) publisher == IOS Press possibly conflict == primary author is inventor of SORCER & FIPRE, third author is director of MTSC at AFRL which collaborates with SorcerSoft ... but editors and most peer-reviewers have no conflicts

20th IPSE ICCE peer-reviewers

reviewer at 20th ISPE ICCE[] reviewer's home university-slash-org conceivableaka possible COI Ahmed Al-Ashaab Cranfield University, UK Amy Trappey National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan Cees Bil RMIT University, Australia Eric Simmon NIST, USA maybe? NIST funded FIPRE, the predecessor of SORCER, was Simmon involved? Essam Shehab Cranfield University, UK Geilson Loureiro INPE, Brazil Georg Rock University of Applied Science, Germany Jerzy Pokojski Warsaw University of Technology, Poland maybe? Sobolewski previously taught here; possible coworker/student? - No COI - it is a completely different faculty. He works at the Faculty of Automotive and Construction Machinery Engineering (http://ipbm.simr.pw.edu.pl/prac/pokojski_jerzy.htm) Prubach (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC) John Cha Beijing Jiaotong University, China John Mo RMIT University, Australia Josip Stjepandic PROSTEP, AG, Germany Kazuo Hiekata University of Tokyo, Japan Mike Sobolewski TTU, Texas, USA YES, works w/ Kolonay && funds FIPRE/SORCER Nel Wognum Wageningen University, The Netherlands Parisa Ghodous University of Lyon, France Rajkumar Roy Cranfield University, UK Ricardo Goncalves UNINOVA, Portugal Richard Curran Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands meh ... IOS Press recently bought out Delft University Press Shuichi Fukuda Stanford University, USA Shuo-Yan Chou Peking University, China

TBD sources which need sorting and filling

Kazumo#12 / Mwsobol#3 url == www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=22393 title == "Unified Mogramming with Var-Oriented Modeling and Exertion-Oriented Programming Languages" Mwsobol#4 url == http://repositories.tdl.org/ttu-ir/handle/2346/15257 title == Max Berger's research (from Germany), a federated filesystem developed for SORCER Kazumo#11 author == M. Sobolewski editor == Anneke Kleppe chapter title == Chapter 3 "Languages and Mograms" book title == Software Language Engineering: Creating Domain-Specific Languages Using Metamodels 132 url == ?? title == ?? (won best-paper award) authors == Dan Kerrn, M.Sobolewski Kazumo#13 (this is a wiki methinks?) url == http://www.intechopen.com/books/howtoreference/advances-in-computer-science-and-it/metacomputing-with-federated-method-invocation Pawelpacewicz#73 url == http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2012-5520 author1 == Scott Burton, American Optimization, LLC; Manager Ph.D. AIAA SEnior Member author2 == Edward Alyanak, Air Force Research Laboratory; Project Engineer Ph.D. AFRL/RQSA AIAA Senior Member author3 == Raymond Kolonay, Air Force Research Laboratory; Principal Engineer Ph.D. AFRL/RQSA AIAA Associate Fellow abstract == describes SORCER's application in ESAV project

NAN LI x3 or x4 of Beijing

Shortname == N.Li 2008. journal paper (Kozamo#1) url == http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-HBGB200804012.htm (in Chinese) authors == ZHANG Rui-hong, LI Nan, CHA Jian-zhong, LU Yi-ping (张瑞红； 李楠； 查建中； 陆一平). type of source == journal paper w/ keyword SORCER title == A collaborative engineering design environment based on SOA (基于SOA的工程协同设计环境). publisher == (Chinese) Journal of Hebei University of Technology, vol.37, no.4 (河北工业大学学报), date == April 2008 (2008年04期), pages == 5 (pp.40-44) Shortname == N.Li 2009. PhD thesis (Kozamo#6) url == http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10004-2010040776.htm authors == Li Nan (李楠). type of source == PhD Dissertation title == A design activity modelling method for distributed design resources integration (一种用于分布式设计资源集成的设计活动建模方法) , publisher == Beijing Jiaotong University (北京交通大学) date == 2009-10-01 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == N.Li 2011_A. journal paper (Kozamo#3_A) url == ??website?? authors == Nan Li; Bin Liu; Tao Feng type of source == conference paper w/ keyword SORCER title == A Loosely-Coupled Platform for Urban Traffic Strategic Noise Mapping, publisher == Proceedings of 2011 World Congress on Engineering and Technology, Vol. 07 date == ??year?? (~2011) pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == N.Li 2011_B. journal paper (Kozamo#3_B) url == http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-34522-7_20?no-access=true authors == Wensheng Xu, Nan Li, type of source == conference paper w/ keyword SORCER title == A Loosely-Coupled Platform for Urban Traffic Strategic Noise Mapping, publisher == Proc 2012 Int'l Conf on IT & SW Engin — Lecture Notes in EE, Vol.211, date == 2013, pages == 8 (pp175-182) Shortname == N.Li 2011_C. conference paper (Kozamo#9) url == ??website?? authors == Nan Li type of source == conference paper w/ keyword SORCER title == Resources Integration and Binding in Distributed Collaborative Design Process. publisher == Proceedings of the First International Conference on Networking and Distributed Computing, Hangzhou, China date == 2011 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == ICDMA'11 aka N.Li 2011_D. Suggested as WP:RS to satisty WP:NOTE. url == http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6051863&queryText%3DA+SOOA+Based+Distributed+Computing+Mechanism+for+Road+Traffic+Noise+Mapping authors == Nan Li ; Tao Feng ; Bin Liu affiliation == Sch. of Mater. & Mech. Eng., Beijing Technol. & Bus. Univ., Beijing, China ; title == A SOOA Based Distributed Computing Mechanism for Road Traffic Noise Mapping pages == 4 pages devoted (pg109-112) to this paper, 1402 pages total in the proceedings (two softcover volumes) abridged abstract == Current traffic noise mapping systems are not ideal for distributed computing in dynamic network. This paper investigates the approach and mechanism of distributed noise map generation based on SOOA. SORCER is employed to build a highly flexible distributed network services space. After that, a SOOA-based computer-aided noise-mapping system is presented. publisher#1 == 2011 Second International Conference on Digital Manufacturing and Automation (ICDMA) publisher#2 == TBD? (IEEE Press maybe?) (IEEE Press maybe?) IEEE – please take a look here:http://www.proceedings.com/13060.html in the product description,another prove you can find here:http://toc.proceedings.com/13060webtoc.pdf (they are official publisher and also methinks the sponsor of the conference) was publication peer-reviewed aka refereed by conference's independent science-board == On the conference’s web page you can find info describing the fact that papers “… are subject to both review and editing.”: http://www.icdma.org/paper-submission was publication fact-checked (or peer-reviewed) by ICDMA editorial-staff == Please see above was publication fact-checked (or peer-reviewed) by IEEE editorial-staff == Confirmation of peer review process by IEEE is described here: http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/authors/publish_benefits.html "conference papers ... undergo a thorough peer review process before acceptance for publication or presentation ... The reader or conference attendee is assured the research published is strong and credible." url of Proceedings of the ICDMA editorial/referee policy == Please see above http://www.icdma.org/paper-submission is at least one publisher independent == YES not only one: IEEE, ICDMA is publisher a vanity press == IEEE is a very reputable publisher, in particular, for computer science papers and journals and as such is definitely not a vanity press. Please take a look onhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Electrical_and_Electronics_Engineers conf_date == 5th-7th August 2011 (in Zhangjiajie, Hunan, China) ... published the same year doi == http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICDMA.2011.34 isbn == 978-1-4577-0755-1 (print) , 978-0-7695-4455-7 (ebook) cited by == n/a ... "as provided in real-time from CrossRef™, Scopus™ and Web of Science™." Shortname == N.Li 2012. journal paper (Kozamo#2) url == http://mall.cnki.net/magazine/Article/JSJY201208019.htm (in Chinese) authors == LI Nan, FENG Tao, LIU Bin1, LI Xian-hui, LIU Lei (李楠； 冯涛； 刘斌； 李贤徽； 刘磊). type of source == journal paper w/ keyword SORCER title == A distributed computing method for traffic noise mapping based on Service Object-Oriented Architecture (基于面向服务对象体系结构的交通噪声地图分布式计算方法). publisher == (Chinese) Journal of Computer Applications, vol.32, no.8 (计算机应用), date == August 2012 (2012年08期), pages == 4 (pp.2146-2149)

U.Cranfield in the UK

Shortname == Cranfield 2007. chapter (Beavercreekful#1) url == http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-540-72377-6_10 chapter title == Evolutionary Computing within Grid Environment book title == Advances in Evolutionary Computing for System Design Studies in Computational Intelligence, Vol.66 date == 2007 pages == pp 229-248 publisher == Springer Verlag abstract == reviews SOA's including SORCER & FIPRE

RUSSIAN NEWSPAPERS x3

Beavercreekful#3 url == http://vestnik_old.ulsu.ru/issues/878/4 title == Техас готов к сотрудничеству" (Texas is Accepting Research Collaboration) type of source == Russian weekly newspaper publisher == Вестник - Областная еженедельная газета details == in Ulyanovsk Russia, where the largest Russian air vehicles are designed and manufactured, also the home of the Ulyanovsk State University Beavercreekful#4 url == http://vestnik.ulsu.ru/19-1145-07-iyunya-2013/takzhe-chitayte/sorcer-nam-v-pomosch title == "SORCER нам в помощь" (SORCER helps us) type of source == Russian weekly newspaper publisher == Вестник - Областная еженедельная газета date == June 7, 2013 (#19) details == in Ulyanovsk Russia, where the largest Russian air vehicles are designed and manufactured, also the home of the Ulyanovsk State University Beavercreekful#9 url == http://www.ssau.ru/files/editions/polet/2007/13-14-2007.pdf title == В СГАУ выступал профессор Техасского университета publsher == полет N13􏰁14, 30 мая 2007 г. инновационная образовательная программа

CHINESE EDU NEWS x4

Beavercreekful#5 url == http://www.news.uestc.edu.cn/NewsRead.aspx?newsID=57207 title == "Service oriented computing environment for BCA" publisher == News Center for UESTC, China date == 2013-03-21 Beavercreekful#6 url == http://mece.njtu.edu.cn/hzjl/gjhz/6752.htm title == “SORCER and the Service-oriented Programming Model” Beavercreekful#7 url == http://mse.hust.edu.cn/news.php?id=13279 author == 著名计算机专家Michael Sobolewski教授来我院学术交流, date == 发布时间:2013-03-01 发布人: 浏览次数：823 Beavercreekful#8 url == http://www.hustcad.com/content.aspx?typeid=156&id=625 author == Michael Sobolewski教授来我公司进行学术交流 publisher == Tianyu Soft, China Industrial Application Software

PHD THESIS x4 (cf N.Li 2009 above)

Shortname == G.Goteng 2009. PhD thesis (Beavercreekful#2) url == https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/4423/1/Gokop_Goteng_thesis_2009.pdf title == Development of a Grid Service for Multi-objective Design Optimisation type of source == PhD thesis author == Gokop Goteng abstract == lit review & industry survey ... of grid services ... (including SORCER) date == 2009 publisher == Cranfield University (School of Applied Sciences) Shortname == J.Yu 2010. PhD thesis (Kozamo#7) url == http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10004-1011102578.htm authors == Yu Jiaqing (于加晴). type of source == PhD Dissertation title == Research on the design process reuse method based on decomposition (基于分解的设计过程重用方法研究) , publisher == Beijing Jiaotong University (北京交通大学) date == 2011-06-01 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == L.Kong 2013. PhD thesis (Kozamo#8) url == http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10004-1013279659.htm authors == Kong Lingjun (孔令军). type of source == PhD Dissertation title == Research on servitization method of design resources in the cloud manufacturing environment (云制造环境下的设计资源服务化方法研究) , publisher == Beijing Jiaotong University (北京交通大学) date == 2013-06-01 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == DaytonThesis. Ph.D. thesis (more than one?) from from University of Dayton url == https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:10:0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:dayton1335270317 permalink == http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=dayton1335270317 title == Incorporation of Computational Fluid Dynamics into Flight Vehicle Preliminary Design author == Ernest D. Thompson thesis == Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) publisher == University of Dayton and OhioLINK home == University of Dayton committee == Franklin E. Eastep PhD (CmteChair & DirectAdvisor), Jose A. Camberos PhD, Raymond M. Kolonay PhD, Ramana V. Grandhi PhD, Rolf Sondergaard PhD cmte homes == Prof Emeritus MechE&AeroE, AdjunctProf MechE&AeroE, AdjunctProf MechE&AeroE, DistinguishedProf Mech&MaterialsE Wright State, SeniorResearcher in TurbineBranch of AFRL PropulsionDirectorate also signed off by == John G. Weber PhD (AssociateDean for U.Dayton School of Engineering), Tony E. Saliba PhD (WilkeDistinguishedProf & Dean for U.Dayton School of Engineering) date == May 2012 possible COI == Dayton is near Wright-Patterson AFB, the USAF facility where AFRL and SORCER are being created, Kolonay is adjunct prof @ dayton, director of MTSC @ afrl, and on thesis cmte. Grandhi supervised the WrightThesis, see above, but is prolly independent unless he get AFRL funding. Sondegaard works for AFRL, and is prolly an actual/potential enduser of SORCER for turbine-design. Seems pretty independent, by typically-insular academic standards, and as a PhD thesis, can be used with care. pages == 261 (content in 243 pages ... around 12 pages specifically about SORCER) subject == Aerospace Engineering (Air Vehicle Design) MLA == Thompson, Ernest. "Incorporation of Computational Fluid Dynamics into Flight Vehicle Preliminary Design." Electronic Thesis or Dissertation. University of Dayton, 2012. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. 25 Dec 2013. license == This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States (aka public domain... can quote long passages if we wish)

details of DaytonThesis w.r.t. SORCER/exertions/SOOA

abstract == Nonlinear, high fidelity aerodynamic analysis methods are considered computationally expensive and impractical for use in the preliminary design environment. In lieu of nonlinear methods, linear aerodynamic methods are utilized in the execution of design tasks because of their computational efficiency. Linear codes are considered accurate in low Mach number flight regimes where aerodynamics is generally linear but are not accurate in transonic flight regime due to the simplified assumptions that are required by such codes. This investigation demonstrates that nonlinear aerodynamic analysis methods are necessary when performing design tasks in the presence of nonlinear phenomena. To reduce the cost of using nonlinear aerodynamic analysis, the velocity transpiration boundary condition was employed to simulate surface deformations and control surface deflections. Observations showed velocity transpiration offers significant computational savings when compared to mesh motion enabled codes. To improve turnaround, a distributed computing framework wasadopted to distribute workload and information storage across a network. A comparative design study was carried out comparing linear and nonlinear analysis tools in design. A rectangular wing's structural mass was optimized to perform both a roll and pull-up maneuver while subjected to rolleffectiveness and skin stress constraints. At a subsonic design point, the linear and nonlinear tools produced similar designs. However, at a transonic design point, the tools produced significantly different designs. The addition of aerodynamic shape variables to the design space at the transonic design point led to a further enhanced design. The results of this study reaffirm the notion that nonlinear high-fidelity aerodynamic analysis methods must be utilized when designing vehicles that will operate in nonlinear regimes. Further, several methods were demonstrated that could reduce the cost of using nonlinear analysis methods. SORCER-related technology is covered in reasonable depth: 3 pages in ch#4, 3 pages in ch#5, 6 pages in ap#G. which is a total of a dozen pages out of 243 pages of content, aka about 5% of the thesis. That said, sorcer played *the* key part, allowing the non-linear analysis to be computationally feasible. Exertions are mentioned on about 50% of those dozen pages (and are implicit in most of the rest of them), and services were mentioned in 80% of the dozen (and very implicit in all of them). Kolonay is on the thesis cmte, gets seven bibliography entries (out of 73 total aka ~10%), is credited as author of four SORCER-packages (plus helped write a bit of new code specifically for this thesis). Sobolewski is mentioned thrice: in the bibliography, as the creator of SORCER, plus credit for writing a few of the classes used in the thesis (perhaps specifically *for* this thesis project? unclear). selected entries of the 73-entry bibliography. N. S. Khot, F. E. Eastep, and R. M. Kolonay. Method for Enhancement of the Rolling Maneuver of a Flexible Wing. Journal of Aircraft, 35(5):688{694, September-October 1998 G. Anderson, R. Kolonay, and F. Eastep. Control-Surface Reversal in the Transonic Regime. Journal of Aircraft, 35(5):688{694, September-October 1998 R. Kolonay and M. Dindar. Lockheed Martin 1999 Aeroelasticity Shared Vision Project Final Report. Technical report, General Electric Corporate Research and Development, 1999 P. C. Chen, D. Sarhaddi, and D. D. Liu. Volume 4; ZAERO Theoretical Manual. Wright-Patterson Technical Report 3052, AFRL, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, February 1999 R. Kolonay, M. Dindar, M. Love, and A. De La Garza. A Methodology of Large Scale Compuational Aeroelasticity For The MDA/MDO Environment. AIAA Paper 2000-4789, AIAA, 2000 F. Eastep, G. Anderson, P. Beran, and R. Kolonay. Control Surface Reversal in the Transonic Flight Regime Including Viscous Effects. Journal of Aircraft, 38(4):653{663, Jul.-Aug. 2001 Air Force Research Laboratory, WPAFB, OH. Air Vehicles Unstructured Solver User's Manual, January 2005 Raymond M. Kolonay and Franklin E. Eastep. Optimal Scheduling of Control Surfaces on Flexible Wings to Reduce Induced Drag. Journal of Aircraft, 43(6):1655{1661, November-December 2006 Ernest Thompson, Raymond Kolonay, Franklin Eastep, and Jose Camberos. Aeroelastic Analysis with Transpiration Enabled Euler Flow Solver. AIAA Paper 2007-2331, AIAA, April 2007. 48th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Waikii, Hawaii. Michael Sobolewski. Handbook On Business Information Systems, chapter Chaper 35 Object-Oriented Metacomputing with Exertions. World Scientific Publishing Co. Ore. Ltd., Toh Tuck Link, Singapore, 2010 Appendix G, on printed-page 230-245, is half-a-dozen pages explaining how SORCER works, what service-oriented means, and what exertions are. Recommended, and as pub-domain, we can reuse it if we like. As for the aerospace-design portion of the thesis, SORCER is specifically covered in the chapters on efficient automated numerical optimization of the wing-shape during the design-phase, as well as in the conclusions (nonlinear optimization is made possible by the efficiency gains of SORCER's grid-computing network-parallelism... this is not especially helpful at Mach 0.50 speed, but it hands-down results in a better wing-design for transonic flight at Mach 0.89). chapter four, distributed design optimization, printedPage73==pdfPage90 ...a grid-computing environment... Within SORCER the numerical optimizer and the aeroelastic solvers were exposed as services on a network. SORCER reduced the computational expense of using nonlinear aerodynamic analysis method within the preliminary design environment by allowing the computational workload to be distributed across a network of computers. SORCER allowed for multiple copies of services to be available for use when executing a design study. This effectively reduced the computational expense of using a nonlinear aerodynamic method in the preliminary design environment. chapter four, distributed design optimization, printedPage75&76==pdfPage92&93 The numerical optimization code utilized in this investigation was Design Optimization Tools (DOT). It is developed and maintained by Vanderplaats R&D Inc. The strategy used to solve the optimization problem was constructed within SORCER. ...the code determines ... if [automated] design investigation has converged and if an optimal [wing] design has been discovered. chapter five, conclusions, printedPage111&112==pdfPage128&129 The last set of tasks performed in this investigation involved executing the transpiration enabled aeroelastic solver in the performance of preliminary design tasks. To further improve the computational effciency of the transpiration enabled nonlinear aeroelastic solver, a preliminary design environment was constructed in SORCER. SORCER grid-computing capabilities allowed for design problems to scale across the computation resources available on a network of computers. In the execution of multidisciplinary design optimization studies, the velocity transpiration enabled computational aeroelastic solver proved quite serviceable. The solver generated optimal structural designs at a subsonic design point of Mach 0.50 and transonic design point of Mach 0.89. The designs developed using the [SORCER-based] nonlinear aerodynamic method compared to design produced using [traditional] linear aerodynamics. At subsonic design point [Mach 0.50] the optimal designs produced by the linear and nonlinear methods were very similar there was only 14.69 slugs difference in structural mass. However, at transonic design point [Mach 0.89] the structural design were very different. The design generated using the linear aerodynamic method did not properly account for the presence of a shock wave... ...proof that linear design tools produced completely different designs than nonlinear tools in a nonlinear flight regime. ... If a designer chose to use the design obtained using linear aerodynamic analysis methods as the basis of a detailed design or prototype, the end result could be a costly redesign of the structure because the design failed to account shock wave effects. Through the performance of the design optimization study portion of this investigation, it was demonstrated how distributed computing can be used to accelerate computational analysis through coarse parallelization of computational effort. Analysis tools were deployed across a network of computers as services. Information was transported from analysis service to analysis service via web servers, network proxies. Data was passed within service context data structures. SORCER's framework allowed for analysis tasks to be executed concurrently or sequentially depending [on] data dependencies. The design process was accelerated through the exploitation of this parallelism. A unique aspect of this work was the fact that the optimization design strategy was implemented within the design framework. One programs the network as oppose to programming individual computer systems. The framework calculated exact sensitivities via finite difference directly, selecting the appropriate network services to dynamically compute a gradient or function evaluations. The framework permitted some failure recovery in the analysis. Code was implemented to check for corrupt output. Intermediate results were archived in Java objects. Through execution of this investigation several ideas could be implemented to improve computational efficiency of nonlinear CFD [computational fluid dynamics] in the preliminary design environment. page113... paraphrasing: explains how greater performance could be achieved, by rewriting the CFD and CSD apps (computational fluid & structural dynamics) to be more granular, which would permit SORCER to expose subcomponents thereof as services in a parallelized pipeline (finer-grained parallelism rather than the coarse-grained parallelism actually used in the thesis project) page113, quoting: SORCER could offer a computation advantage over the conventional analysis codes... for very large problems SORCER may offer computational advantage over the message-passing interface currently used by the CFD solver to parallelize analysis effort.

MASTERS THESIS x3

Shortname == A.Liu 2010. master's thesis (Kozamo#4) url == http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10004-2010260506.htm authors == Liu Anjun (刘安军). type of source == Master's Dissertation title == Research on encapsulation method of finite element analysis service in Concurrent Engineering (并行工程中基于SOA的有限元分析服务封装技术研究), publisher == Beijing Jiaotong University (北京交通大学) date == 2010-06-01 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == W.Wang 2011. master's thesis (Kozamo#5) url == http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10004-1012355719.htm authors == Wang Wei (王伟). type of source == Master's Dissertation title == Research of testing process modelling and management of weapon equipment systems (武器装备系统测试过程建模与管理系统研究), publisher == Beijing Jiaotong University (北京交通大学) date == 2011-05-26 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == WrightThesis. Ph.D. Master's thesis (more than one?) from Wright State university overview_url == https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?222745293673013::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:86171 fulltext_URL ==https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap:0:0:APPLICATION_PROCESS=DOWNLOAD_ETD_SUB_DOC_ACCNUM:::F1501_ID:wright1316463759,attachment possible COI == Wright State is next door to Wright-Patterson AFB, the USAF facility where AFRL and SORCER are being created (some of the thesis-committee is possibly WP:COI ... student may work there now). Grandhi is a prof at Wright (both theses), Kolonay is dir of AFRL (both theses), Taylor is TBD. To use a PhD thesis as a wikiReliable_Source, the committee which reviews the thesis must be independent... ...and ideally, the published thesis itself must be widely cited. Is this the case at Wright State? Is this the case at U.Dayton? Please advise. Interestingly, although this is Master's rather than PhD, there was a committee of three (not just the one advisor); the Dayton thesis had a cmte of five. author == Karkada Nagesha Aithala title == A Collaborative Computational Framework for Multidisciplinary and Reliability-based Analysis and Optimization Using SORCER pages == 85 (content in 62 pages ... 30 pages specifically about SORCER) date == Finalized 16 Sept 2011 field == Mechanical Engineering (also AeroE & CompE & CompSci) signed off by == Ramana V. Grandhi PhD (thesis director aka advisor), George P. G. Huang PhD (Mech&MaterialsE Chair), Andrew T. Hsu PhD (School of Graduate Studies Dean) final examination cmte == Ramana V. Grandhi PhD (see above), Raymond M. Kolonay PhD (AFRL), Ronald F. Taylor PhD (TBD?)

SUPERGRANTS x3 or x4

Shortname == NIST funding agency == NIST/ATP (USD$21M) title == FIPER project universities == Ohio + Stanford corporations == GE (GE GRC && GE Aviation) + BFGoodrich + Parker Hannifin + Ohio Aerospace Institute + Engineous Software Shortname == USAF Shortname == NSFC 2012. quad-year R&D grant (Kozamo#10) url == ??website?? authors == (potentially... Kozamo et al.) type of source == (classified? TBD? high-speed-railway equipment) title == Research on manufacturing resource integration and coordination management based on SOOA in cloud manufacturing environment publisher == National Science Foundation of China project#51175033 (NSFC) date == 2012/2013/2014/2015 pages == ??pgs?? Shortname == Ulanyovsk(sp) rumours

how many source-code repos are there?

Questions about the number of forks/repos of the SORCER codebase (plus ancillary codebases surrounding it), which groups used what codebases (historically and recently), which groups contributed *code* as opposed to money/endusers/similar.

1. SORCER is about grids of distributed algorithms, for concurrent-engineering design-disciplines
2. SORCER is a huge computing environment, only a fraction of the results related to SORCER have been published
3. This is partly because some of the apps are classified (military), and partly because some of the apps are proprietary (corporate trade-secrets)
4. Still, there is a conceptual framework, and a reference architecture, which is what has been covered in the wikipedia article (to date).
5. Mwsobol works full-time for AFRL/WPAFB (which maintains one? two? more? repos of the SORCER codebase... plus various USAF-proprietary libs/apps/etc).
6. Mwsobol occasionally teachs SORCER, including in Russia (how many places? Ulyanovsk State University), and the Russians maintain their own SORCER repo (just one?)
7. Mwsobol occasionally teachs SORCER, including in China (how many places? Beijing Jiaotong University), and the Chinese maintain their own SORCER repo (just one?)
8. Cranfield University in the United Kingdom ... do they use SORCER, nowadays? When did they use it? What about UK military or British Airways or similar?
9. Mwsobol occasionally does consulting work, and helps interested parties to get started with SORCER
10. One such interested party was SorcerSoft.com, located in Poland, who got trained by Mwsobol during 2013
11. SorcerSoft.com is now just starting to develop commercial GUI-tools for SORCER
12. SorcerSoft.com's proprietary work is based on a private repo, an internal fork of the open-source codebase, is not available to the public,
13. SorcerSoft.com's public work is based on the version developed at TTU (aka SORCER Labs), which is currently open-source
14. Mwsobol occasionally teachs SORCER, including (in January 2014) in Poland at PJIIT, which is using an open-source version (different from SorcerSoft.com's? Different from SorcerSoft.org's repo, if any?)
15. SorcerSoft.org ... which is not officially connected to SorcerSoft.com ... is the current home of Mwsobol's SORCER Lab (still at TTU? or now at AFRL? or maybe now at PJIIT? or maybe just spun-off to Mwsobol's private webhost? confusion!)
16. The historical FIPER codebase, which was used at GE from the late 1990s (NIST-ATP-funded from 1999-2003 but Mwsobol first hired at GE GRC in 1996) for turbine-design.
17. One of the small companies involved with FIPER was later acquired by Dassault, the EU corporation. Do they have an internal version of FIPER, or of SORCER?
18. Is FIPER still being used by GE/Dassault/Stanford/OhioUniversities/others? If so, is the codebase (or are the codebases) available publically?
19. Has GE used SORCER?
20. Has Dassault used SORCER?
21. Has Stanford used SORCER?
22. Have OhioUniversities used SORCER? (yes, U.Dayton PhD + WrightStateU MEng) What about Ohio Aerospace Institute? What about BFGoodrich?
23. During the transition from FIPER to SOCER-and-then-SORCER,
24. some external links are redundant, already listed at http://sorcersoft.com
25. one particular repo was developed at TTU, and is now maintained by sorcerSoft.com
26. Github contributors page , https://github.com/sorcersoft/sorcer/graphs/contributors
27. This particular github group is the maintainers of the version developed at SORCER Lab
28. There are many maintainers of multiple repositories, not just that one
29. the SORCER platform is implemented in many places.
30. The MSTC/AFRL/WPAFB/USAF is using and developing SORCER to ... [3]
31. but, in the 2012 DaytonThesis, Kolonay (director of MSTC) was specifically mentioned as implementing three or four major class-libraries(?)
32. It is not fair to those who really contributed and are ignored.
33. Unless all development sites are listed it is just misleading information

Note that wikipedia tends to just give one main "official link" ... is that SorcerSoft.org , nowadays ... right? As for the main subject of this talkpage section, anybody want to try and give me the overview of what groups were responsible for what code, when? Please start historically, so we can give a summary of the history of the project's code, in the article. Danke, it's appreciated. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:48, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

"How many source-code repos there are, and who runs them, and what year(s) each repo was active." There are currently two maintained repos. There is one at the U.S. Air Forcer Research Lab(AFRL) which contains some new features and proprietary extensions - for example the whole Var-Oriented Modeling framework (see the latest papers). As far as I know this repo started around 2007/08 based on the one at TTU. The second one is the open source version maintained by my colleagues and myself at github.com/sorcersoft/ - it is a stripped down and mavenized version based on AFRL's version from mid 2013. Previously (2002-2009) SORCER was developed by Prof. Sobolewski and his students at Texas Tech University (TTU) but when he decided to quit TTU in May 2009 the lab was closed and the repo there was abandoned (I was his last student at TTU). Prof. Sobolewski doesn't keep SORCER to himself, he is open to invite others to use it and develop it but it is a rather complex technology and it is difficult to find people willing and competent enough to do it. Therefore, in the meantime there were several moments when the source code was given to students or researchers elsewhere (mostly China and Russia - the last attempt in May 2013 when Sobolewski was invited to run a workshop on SORCER to Ulyanovsk State University) but I don't believe that they still maintain and develop it, although of course one cannot be always sure what happend to those sources afterwards. Prubach (talk) 13:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

So, there is SorcerSoftDotCom, repo#1_A which is an open-source repo at github, and repo#1_B which is a closed-source fork thereof for the proprietary GUI-tools. Next, there is repo#2 closed-source repo used inside AFRL. What is SorcerSoftDotOrg, does it not have a repo? Or is it the open-source-portion of the AFRL repo? Historically, there was repo#0 at TTU, the ancestor of all current SORCER-repos. Historically-or-maybe-currently, there was repo#3_A at Ulanyovsk, repo#3_B at Samara (or maybe they shared repo#3_A?). Historically-or-maybe-currently, there was repo#4_A in China (and maybe more than one repo?). However, notability is not temporary, we need to go further back in time to FIPER. There was a FIPER repo, call it repo#5, used at GE/GRC, right? Is it still in use? Have they upgraded to SORCER? What *do* they use nowadays, does anybody know? Goel was from NY... was he working with GE and with TTU, or just with TTU? Furthermore, this FIPER repo#5 was the ancestor of TTU repo#0, but FIPER was also the direct ancestor of Engenious repo#6_A, which became Dassault repo#6_B, which is now Simulia repo#6_C (munged in with Dassault's Abaqus product-line). Also there was C.D.Cera(FIPER?) + Nnanji(FIPER), what repo? In the UK, we have W.D.Li(FIPER) + G.Goteng(SORCER) — what repos did they use? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

technical question, about exertions versus federations

"An exertion as the service classifier is used in SORCER and so all federations such that the exertion can be bound to at runtime are instances of it." --Beavercreekful

1. I do not understand the above sentence.
2. I'm familiar theoretically with Self.
3. I'm familiar with Javascript-style prototyping where there is no classdef; objects are just modified-clones of previous objects.
4. An exertion is an nsh-shell-script, written in EOL or in Java.
5. A running/executing exertion is a service (kinda-like a web service but-not-exactly-like).
6. A federation is a compound-service (a wrapper around a set of services... and the wrapper itself can be treated as a service).
7. If I have a file called myExertion.sorcer stored on my local PC, that file (or the associated config-file maybe) will give the pointers (names? network-locations? URLs?) to the federations it depends upon.
8. When I use nsh to execute-slash-run myExertion.sorcer , the bindings of the actual underlying dependencies (local federations/services or remote federations/services or local Linux apps/datafiles) are bound-at-runtime.

What does the word "it" at the end of the confusing sentence, really mean? "...so all federations such that the exertion can be bound to at runtime are instances of it."

1. If an exertion can be bound-at-runtime to a federation, those federations are instances/subclasses/interfaceImplementations of that exertion?
2. Or, if an exertion can be bound-at-runtime to a federation, then that exertion must be an instance/subclass/interfaceImplementation of those federations?
3. Or, something else entirely?  :-)

Thanks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:48, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

---

• Ad. 1) I do not understand the above sentence. — 74

Let's start with the UML definition of "classifier" with "exertions" added for my service-oriented class.

classifier. A collection of instances that have something in common. A classifier can have features that characterize its instances. Classifiers include interfaces, classes, datatypes, components, services (exertions).

If object a is an instance of a class A, A is the classifier of a.

And now it's important to understand the difference with interface types. An object a of class A that implements interface B is instance of interface B. In other words, the interface B is a classifier of a. By the interface type we can classify objects independently of the object implementation (class). SORCER uses interface types in exertion signatures to bind to network objects that implement the signature interfaces. Mwsobol (talk) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, that's much clearer, thanks. My understanding is that there are two (colloquial) types of exertions, as used in SORCER. There are the usual sort, the front-end exertions, coded up by a savvy aerospace-designer to automate some kind of wing-design-analysis procedure, or somesuch. These front-end exertions (FEEs) run locally, and can optionally rely on other FEEs, also running locally, but coded so as to implement specific interfaces. In addition to calling each other (possibly within the same JVM instance or possibly across multiple JVM instances running with different CPU affinities and/or security settings), FEEs can also call remote back-end-exertions across the network. Much like the FEEs, the BEEs are just exertions... but running on another box.

  For the sake of being concrete, we have a client-side aerospace-engineer-slash-programmer named Alyssa, who implements her own set of four FEEs on her local workstation, A1 A2 A3 A4. These are wrappers around her local command-line tools for the most part, and call each other (FEE to FEE) from time to time. These are simple FEEs which do not depend on any BEEs that are located across the network. However, there are also four BEEs, B5 B6 B7 B8, which are each running on their own back-end server-box, and exposing their interface-implementations via the SOS (in some handwavy fashion that I do not yet understand). The author of the BEEs was named Ben, who programmed and tested and installed and configured all four BEEs, then left for Hawaii.

  When, on the following Monday, our hero Alyssa goes into work and boots her workstation, she opens nsh and writes A9, an especially complicated FEE, which relies on all eight of our existing A1..A4 local-services and B5..B8 remote-services. When she is finished programming, Alyssa then executes A9, and the magic happens: when on line 111 the code of A9 calls the 'non-internal' Java-function foo(), nsh scans the SOOAverse looking for something which implements foo(), and discovers A1, then dynamically binds the FEE A9 with the FEE-acting-as-a-network-service-A1. Later, when on line 555 the code of A9 calls baz() nsh-slash-SOS discovers B5 implements that, and does the FMI thing to connect A9 into B5 across the network. Finally, when on line 666 (gasp!) the code of A9 calls qux() which is implemented by B6 there is a problem, the server-box B6 was running on just crashed, but luckily, C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 replicated online backup boxen are ready, so nsh-slash-SOS discovers that C6 can provide the implementation of qux() that A9 requires. Happy ending.

  At the end of the day, I understand (or believe I do — please correct as needed) the sentence now... but I don't think the sentence is necessary because I don't see what is special about the words.

An exertion	A local nsh shell-script (aka FEE)
as the service classifier	calls Java-interfaces implemented in other scripts
is used in SORCER	which are discovered by nsh-slash-SOS
and so	when configured as SOS-visible service-providers.
all federations	All server-side nsh shell-scripts (aka BEEs)
such that the exertion	can be called by local nsh shell-scripts (FEEs)
can be bound to	with function-calls to methods defined in Java-interfaces
at runtime	dynamically bound at function-call-time (or at FEE launch?) by nsh-slash-SOS.
are instances	Speaking in terms of theoretical computer science, the FEE is an 'instance'
of it (the federation).	of the set of all BEEs (the network-visible 'federation') which is relies upon.

Please correct my errors and/or misunderstandings. Because the goal is to explain SORCER in 100 words or less at the top of the article, and then describe the details of SORCER in 1000 words or less in the main body of the article (or perhaps summarize the key details is a better way to put it), my goal is to use as much Java-and-CPP-and-ALGOL-style concepts as possible, so that the casual reader who has some programming background will be able to understand what SORCER is/does/etc. Even if they only have six months of 9th-grade Intro to HTML and Intro to Javascript under their belt.

  For speed, I'll go ahead and reply to your other sections below, but if my assumptions in the table above are wrong, no doubt I'll be even more wrong in my answers below. Do not feel that you are required to respongd toeach reply of mine, or even read them, if you can already tell I'm off the true path.  :-)   Thanks for your assistance. — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

If an exertion with a service signature including a service type B (practically Java interface B in SORCER) matches the interface of a network object (service provider) that implements the interface B then this service provider is the instance of this exertion. Now if an exertions includes 5 signatures with 5 services types (Java interfaces) then five service providers in the network that implement these interfaces create the service federation for this exertion. This federation is an instance of the exertion. In that case we say that the exertion binds to the federation and matching (binding) is done by the SORCER OS. Take into account that there in no any static references to service providers in exertion signatures.

Service providers are replicated for reliability and load balancing. So, when you run the same exertion again you can get usually a different federation (a collection of matching providers based on the interface types only). Obviously another attributes can be used in SORCER as well if required but the basic concept of binding is based on service types. That federation concept does not exist in any other service-oriented platform. By the way provisioning in SORCER is based on the service type concept as well. For a set of signature the SORCER OS on-demand can create a corresponding federation or multiple federations (instances) of a given exertion. Mwsobol (talk) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand the part where you say, "...then this service provider is the instance of this exertion". But what is the *value* of that factoid? Why does a reader (usually referred to as Randy From Boise hereabouts), need to know that exertions-are-classifiers-aka-parents-of-the-federations-which-implement-the-exertion's-client-side-function-calls-to-server-side-interface-implementations-and-thus-federations-can-be-seen-as-instances-of-said-exertions? Can we not just tell Randy, that exertions-make-function-calls-which-nsh-passes-across-the-network-to-server-side-federations-that-implement-the-function-bodies? If not, why not? Given an exertion-which-is-a-classifier-of-a-federation-aka-instance, can I subclass the exertion, or jscript-style-prototype the exertion, to programmatically generate a *new* and distinct federation-instance? Can I use server-side programmatic reflection to modify the client-side *exertion's* implementation at runtime without needing any access to Alyssa's workstation PC? Or maybe something else special.

  I'm going to skip asking how the load-balancing and replication work, specifically... because I suspect that is explained in the helpdocs. But I will note, in my understanding at present, that client-side FEEs are not configured to be load-balanced nor replicated by default, and that server-side BEEs *are* so configured (manually presumably by a sysadmin), but that otherwise there is little difference... both FEEs and BEEs are nsh-shell-scripts, implemented in Java (or Groovy or EOL perhaps). Is this correct? Is it possible for Alyssa in Asia to change her FEE A3 into a network-visible service-provider, that her fellow aerospace-engineer Carly is able to use across the LAN from the seventh floor of the same building in Hong Kong? Next, what about Dan in Denver, can *he* see the A3 nsh-shell-script that Alyssa wrote, and configured to be network-visible to Carly on the 7th floor? Obviously, our friend Dan can get on a plane to Hong Kong, or Dan could install VPN software to make his PC virtually "part" of the LAN in Hong Kong... but does nsh-slash-SOS provide network-visibility only on the LAN, or does it offer web-visibility in some fashion? What nodes are considered fair game, when it comes to replicating BEEs? How is data-storage replicated, if B6 depends on /home/ben/dataset.txt what happens when B6's dedicated node is offline, and the replication-node C6 is trying to take over implementation of qux() for all the FEEs? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• Ad. 4) An exertion is an nsh-shell-script, written in EOL or in Java... — 74

see "How to explain SORCER conceptualizations?" An exertion is a front-end specification of a service federation and its collaborative behavior. A textual form of interpreted exertions are called "netlets", exertions as instances of Exertion interface (Created with SORCER API) are called "exertlets", and exertions created with GUIs are called "service diagrams". Thus, three forms of exertion languages exist: EOL for the network shel (nsh), Java API (no need for the shell), and a visual exertion programming with a GUI that creates a corresponding exertlet or netlet or both if the round trip editing is supported between service diagrams and netlets. Mwsobol (talk) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, so I would instead say, an exertion is an nsh-shell-script, written in EOL, or alternatively, a Java program which directly accesses the SOS API (bypassing nsh). But my understanding is that the "innards" of the server-side federations were *also* just a bunch of (server-side) nsh-shell-scripts-in-EOL, or alternatively (server-side) Java programs, which differed from client-side exertions only in that they were configured to be network-visible.

1. Can a client-side exertion A4 implement an interface, and be configured to be locally-visible to other exertions on that PC, and then have another client-side exertion A9 which classifies the interface-implementation provided by A4? I think the answer is yes, but correct me if I'm wrong.
2. Similarly, can a server-side exertion 'program" B7 implement an interface, and be configured to be locally-visible to other exertions 'programs' on that server, and then have another server-side exertion 'program' B8 which classifies the interface provided by B7? Again, I think the answer is yes, but correct me if I'm wrong.
3. Finally, the big new feature of SORCER-fka-FIPER is that client-side exertion A9 can magically dynamically classify server-side exertion 'service provider' B7, as long as B7 is configured to be network-visible in a way that A9 can see via nsh-slash-SOS (as opposed to B7 just being "locally-visible" to B8).

As for netlets and exertlets (but not service-diagrams which merely are a means of creating those).... My assertion is that a netlet can be written and then run on Alyssa's workstation PC, but also that a netlet can be written and then run on Ben's app-server (or replicated server-farm of app-servers). Same assertion for exertlets. Am I wrong about these? Are service-providers not simply netlets/exertlets which have been configured so as to be network-visible, and optionally replicated? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• Ad. 5) A running/executing exertion is a service (kinda-like a web service but-not-exactly-like). — 74

see "How to explain SORCER conceptualizations?" below. Oh, No!!!
Web services are back-end services (deployed at the app servers) and the front-end client can invoke only one service per invocation with a static server end-point (URL). What the invoked service do later is another story. An exertion is the from-end service that invokes a collaborative federation in the network (as explained above). There is no app servers, no static end-points, service providers are small footprint independent services that can come and go as needed in the global network Mwsobol (talk) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree with everything you say (except the "oh no" portion :-)   ...   but I was under the impression that a "collaborative federation" was in fact implemented with server-side exertions, written by server-sider programmers. When a client-side programmer writes a client-side exertion, nsh-slash-SOS hooks the client-side function-call up tothe server-side function-body. Incorrect? See the final sentence of Prubach's answer at 11:59 here,[4] "you're right about the possibility of dividing execution between the provider ((server-side exertion 'program')) and requestor ((client-side exertion)) - it cannot be done dynamically but needs only a reconfiguration of the provider". I understood that last bit to mean, that a server-side backend service provider, was merely an exertion installed on a server-box, with some special configuration to make it discoverable-on-the-network by the nsh-slash-SOS. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

back-end-federated-programming

"I need to understand whether or not a locally-defined EOL-script, is visible (by default or just optionally or not at all) across the network?" - An EOL script contains the defintion of an exertion. (you can see an example here: [5]) - an EOL script by itself is just a script, and so just like any file you can put it on a web server etc. but it is not exposed by SORCER in anyway. However, when you execute this script using the network shell (NSH) then the tasks defined in it may run on remote machines - everything depends on where you started the Multiplier, Adder and Subtractor services. By default an EOL script (and this particular example as well) doesn't specify whether the exertion will run locally or remotely (although you can limit it to be executed only locally) - this will be determined at runtime dynamically. This is the Front-end federated programming.

Since the main goal of SORCER is to foster reuse, there is a possibility to easily (no coding, just configuration) create a service using an existing exertion - in that case you supply your script and you can start a new service that when called will execute the exertion specified in your EOL script - this is the Backend federated programming because it needs some deployment (configuration and starting of the service) - it is the equivalent of deploying a new BPEL process on a BPEL engine (the process will call other web services but it must be first deployed to be accessible to users).

On the second half of this point, further clarification of the details of back-end-federated-programming please, concerning the typical way back-end-service-providers are created. Here is how I paraphrase/understand what you said. Back-end federated programming is easy: given an existing exertion-defining-scriptfile My.EOL, you can, without further programming, configure&start (aka deploy) a new service[provider], that when called, will execute that exertion (i.e. the one specified in My.EOL). You mention that the 'deploy' step is kinda like Business Process Execution Language process-deployment on a BPEL-engine... but BPEL is web-svcs-stuff, that means the BPEL-engine is a webserver. If I have an engineering-workstation, with AutoCAD and LibreOffice installed, and I'm doing my finite-elt-analysis on my wing-design with some local exertions My1.EOL / My2.EOL / My3.EOL and so on, aka pure front-end-federated-programing, how hard is it to "deploy" My2.EOL so that it becomes a LAN-visible service, that my buddy in the next office can call from *her* local EOL-scriptfiles?

X. Do I have to install a webserver on my workstation-PC, and install the 'backend' pieces of SOS, reconfigure my software firewall to open up a bunch of ports, login as admin to install some daemons, or something complicated like that? Y. Or, do I just open up some config-wizard, click the 'create new svc' button, browse to /home/alyssa/wing/My2.EOL in the wizard, and click 'OK' for a total "deploy" time of sixty seconds flat? Z. Or, something else, please specify.

From your answer to my LAN-and-VPN-question (below), my assumption is that doing back-end-federated-programming is more like the install-a-bunch-of-server-side-junk-and-mess-with-firewalls description. Therefore, in typical practice, our engineer Alyssa would not be able to make My2.EOL into a LAN-visible service from her *own* workstation... instead, she would FTP/NFS/SMB/whatever the scriptfile to an already-configured-server-machine (w/ Apache River infrastructure already up and running!) elsewhere on the LAN, and then ask some friendly sysadmin of that server-machine to run the config-wizard to deploy My2.EOL on that server box. Is this correct?

gory details of SORCER's networking substrate

"Is SOS currently a LAN-slash-VPN-only solution, or whether it can function seamlessly-out-of-the-box through firewalls across the global internet?" The networking layer of SORCER is implemented using JINI/Apache River. Therefore, in this respect it functions just like JINI services themselves. In JINI there is a lookup service (called Reggie) that is used to discover and register existing services. Reggie supports multicasting and unicasting. Obviously, multicast works only in LAN and may be enabled via VPN but it may be rather impractical in this scenario - assuming the VPN has a limited bandwidth, it doesn't make sense to send all multicast requests via VPN when, for example, most of them will be of interest only within the main LAN. In that case you can bridge multiple JINI/SORCER installations using unicast - for that you need to configure the addresses of the remote Reggies in every Reggie. So in that case, multicast doesn't have to be enabled between all the SORCER services on both networks, however, the services must be able to communicate directly once they discover themselves via the Reggies, so firewalls and routers may make that difficult. Prubach (talk) 13:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• Some techie-questions, see here.[6] Does SORCER use the JERI protocol under the hood, and if so, what substrate-transport(s) are supported out of the box? Apache folks say you can send packets as unencrypted-TCP, SSL-over-TCP, or Kerberos-over-TCP ... all these options are effectively LAN-only (because of firewalls in the wild). However, they also say you can send JERI packets over HTTP/HTTPS ... but from your answer to point#3 it sounds like SORCER does not do this. For performance reasons (e.g. is multicast only supported in some transports?), or code-complexity reasons, or historical reasons, or something else? Maybe under the hood SORCER is using JRMP-transport aka old-school RMI stuff? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• River offers infrastructure for dynamic discovery (w/ a registry), and optionally, for on-demand-distribution-of-compiled-code (w/ a class-server). It sounds like SORCER use a River-based-registry aka Reggie, but does SORCER use a River-based-classServer? Or not, and if not, what *does* SORCER use for the distributed-computation-magic it offers? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• You say: "services must be able to communicate directly". This is too abstract. How do they 'communicate directly' across the LAN? What are the specifics? By way of analogy, consider how you would explain FTP to me. There is an FTP client, an app on PC#1. There is an FTP server, a daemon on PC#2. They also "communicate directly" with each other. Specifically, FTP was based on NCP from 1971-1980, and since then on TCP. Active-mode means, the client on PC#1 must know the IP of PC#2 (or DNS-name if we assume PC#2 has a domain-name && PC#1 has a DNS-client), to create the control-channel, a socket from (any-un-priv) port 55555 on PC#1 to (standard) port 21 of PC#2 over LAN-or-internet. Next, the client sends a PORT 55556 command, and the server on PC#2 creates the data-channel from server-port-20 to client-port-55556. This assumes no firewalls in the way, either direction! Thus, in passive-mode, client sends PASV (not PORT 55556), and server replies on ctrl-chan w/ PORT 20, after which *client* creates data-channel from client-port-55556 to server-port-20. Thataway, firewalls only need to be properly configured to make the *server* aka PC#2 web-visible; client can be locked down against intruders. That is FTP, in a nutshell. We can also talk security, there is an optional login-name (or anonymous), plus there are several optional crypto mechanisms (explicit FTPS with AUTH TLS to server-port-21 / implicit FTPS to server-port-990 / "explicit" FTP-over-SSH-tunnelling to server-port-22 / "implicit" SFTP to server-port-22 / maybe others). What does SORCER work like? Feel free to just point me at the appropriate helpdoc for River-and-or-SORCER, if these gory details are already put in writing somewheres. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)