21Th International Configuration Workshop
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
21th International Configuration Workshop Proceedings of the 21th International Configuration Workshop Edited by Lothar Hotz, Michel Aldanondo, Thorsten Krebs September 18 – 19, 2019 Hamburg, Germany Organized by University of Hamburg Hamburger Informatik Technologie‐Center e.V. Department of Computer Science Vogt‐Kölln‐Str. 30, 22527 Hamburg GERMANY ISSN 1613‐0073 Lothar HOTZ, Michel ALDANONDO, Thorsten KREBS, Editors Proceedings of the 21th International Configuration Workshop September 18‐19, 2019, Hamburg, Germany Chairs Lothar Hotz, University of Hamburg, HITeC, Hamburg, Germany Michel Aldanondo, Toulouse University, Mines Albi, France Thorsten Krebs, encoway GmbH, Bremen, Germany Program Committee Michel Aldanondo, Toulouse University, Mines Albi, France Tomas Axling, Tacton Systems, Denmark Andrés Felipe Barco, Universidad Santiago de Cali, Colombia David Benavides, University of Seville, Spain Andreas Falkner, Siemens AG, Austria Alexander Felfernig, Graz University of Technology, Austria Cipriano Forza, University of Padova, Italy Gerhard Friedrich, University of Klagenfurt, Austria Paul Grünbacher, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria Albert Haag, Product Management GmbH, Germany Alois Haselböck, Siemens AG, Austria Petri Helo, University of Vaasa, Finland Lothar Hotz, University of Hamburg, HITeC, Germany Dietmar Jannach, University of Klagenfurt, Austria Thorsten Krebs, encoway GmbH, Bremen, Germany Tomi Männistö, University of Helsinki, Finland Mikko Raatikainen, Aalto University, Finland Rick Rabiser, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria Sara Shafiee, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark Markus Stumptner, University of South Australia, Australia Juha Tiihonen, University of Helsinki, Finland Elise Vareilles, Toulouse University, Mines Albi, France Yue Wang, Hang Seng Management College, Hong Kong Linda Zhang, IESEG Business School of Management Paris, France Local Arrangements Lothar Hotz, University of Hamburg, HITeC, Germany Evelyn Staske, HITeC, Germany Preface Configuration is the task of composing product models of complex systems from parameterisable components. This task demands for powerful knowledge‐representation formalisms to capture the great variety and complexity of configurable product models. Furthermore, efficient reasoning and conflict resolution methods are required to provide intelligent interactive behavior in configurator software, such as solution search, satisfaction of user preferences, personalization, or optimization. The main goal of the Configuration Workshop is to promote high‐quality research in all technical and application areas related to configuration. In this year, besides typical contributions about knowledge representation and reasoning in configuration, adaptation and re‐configuration of delivered products is a one focus. The workshop is of interest for both, researchers working in the various fields of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies as well as industry representatives interested in the relationship between configuration technology and the business problem behind configuration and mass customization. It provides a forum for the exchange of ideas, evaluations and experiences especially in the use of AI techniques within these application and research areas. The 2019 Workshop on Configuration continues the series of workshops started at the AAAI'96 Fall Symposium and continued on IJCAI, AAAI, and ECAI since 1999. In recent years, the workshop was held independently from major conferences. This year special thanks has to be given to following Configuration Workshop Sponsors: Siemens (Austria), Product Management Haag (Germany), Variantum (Finland), EventHelpr (Austria), encoway (Germany), IMT Mines‐Albi‐Carmaux (France), HITeC (Germany), University of Hamburg (Germany) Lothar Hotz, Michel Aldanondo, and Thorsten Krebs September 2019 Contents Consistency Management Coping with Inconsistent Models of Requirements 1 Juha Tiihonen, Mikko Raatikainen, Lalli Myllyaho, Clara Marie Lüders, and Tomi Männistö Consistency‐based Merging of Variability Models 9 Alexander Felfernig, Mathias Uta, Gottfried Schenner, and Johannes Spöcklberger Conversational Recommendations Utilizing Model‐based Reasoning 13 Oliver Tazl, Alexander Perko, and Franz Wotawa Decision Biases in Preference Acquisition 20 Martin Stettinger, Alexander Felfernig, and Ralph Samer Product and Service Configuration Enrichment of Geometric CAD Models for Service Configuration 22 Daniel Schreiber, Lukas Domarkas, Paul Christoph Gembarski, and Roland Lachmayer Applications and Benefits smartfit: Using Knowledge‐based Configuration for Automatic Training Plan Generation 30 Florian Grigoleit, Peter Struss, and Florian Kreuzpointner Prioritizing Products for Profitable Investments on Product Configuration Systems 38 Sara Shafiee, Lars Hvam, and Poorang Piroozfar A Search Engine Optimization Recommender System 43 Juan Camilo Duque Delgado, Christian David Hoyos, Andrés Felipe Barco Santa, and Elise Vareilles Comparing the Gained Benefits from Product Configuration Systems 48 Sara Shafiee, Lars Hvam, and Anders Haug Configuration Requirements Reusing Components across Multiple Configurators 53 Amartya Ghosh, Anna Myrodia, Lars Hvam, and Niels Henrik Mortensen Adaptive Autonomous Machines – Requirements and Challenges 61 Lothar Hotz, Stephanie von Riegen, Matthias Riebisch, Markus Kiele‐Dunsche, and Rainer Herzog Constraint Solver Requirements for Interactive Configuration 65 Andreas Falkner, Alois Haselböck, Gerfried Krames, Gottfried Schenner, and Richard Taupe Configuration and Standards Portfolio Management: How to Find Your Standard Variants 73 Frank Dylla, Daniel Jeuken, and Thorsten Krebs Copyright © 2019 for the individual papers by the papers' authors. Copyright © 2019 for the volume as a collection by its editors. This volume and its papers are published under the Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Coping with Inconsistent Models of Requirements Juha Tiihonen1 and Mikko Raatikainen1 and Lalli Myllyaho1 and Clara Marie Luders¨ 2 and Tomi Mannist¨ o¨1 Abstract. Issue trackers are widely applied for requirements engi- issues are related to the requirements planned for the next releases. neering and product management. They typically provide good sup- To aggravate the problem, the data in a tracker is heterogeneous and port for the management of individual requirements. However, holis- often inconsistent. Thus, trackers are not optimal for the concerns of tic support for managing the consistency of a set of requirements product management or requirements engineering that need to deal such as a release is largely missing. The quality of issue data may be with different requirement options, alternatives, and constraints, as insufficient for global analyses supporting decision making. We aim well as their dependency consequences when deciding what to do or to develop tools that support product management and requirement not to do. This lack of support exists despite dependencies are found engineering also in cases where the body of requirements, e.g. for to be one of the key concerns that need to be taken into account in a software release, is inconsistent. Software releases can be seen as requirements prioritization [7, 1, 17] and release planning [16, 2]. configurations of compatible, connected requirements. Our approach Our objective is to help holistic management of requirements described in this paper can identify inconsistent elements in bod- while issue trackers are utilized. The specific focus is on the ap- ies of requirements and perform diagnoses using techniques from plication of technologies common in the field of Knowledge Based Knowledge Based Configuration. The research methodology follows Configuration (KBC) to support the stakeholders who are required to the principles of Design Science: we built a prototype implementa- deal with dependent requirements and issues in a tracker in their daily tion for the approach and tested it with relevant use cases. The Qt work. We support decision making such as configuration of release Company has large sets of real requirement data in their Jira issue plans instead of automating it as needs are not known well enough tracker. We characterize that data and use it for empirical perfor- and criteria are hard to formalize. We describe the technical approach mance testing. The approach can support product management and of a system that aims to provide such support. The system is based on requirements engineering in contexts where large, inconsistent bod- generating a requirement model that closely resembles a traditional ies of requirements are typical. Empirical evaluation shows that the configuration model. We also provide data which in practice shows approach scales to usage in large projects, but future work for im- that the approach fits in the context and scales even to large projects. proving performance is still required. Value in real use is highly plau- We aim to address the following research questions: What are the sible but demonstration requires tighter integration with a developed major requirements of the system? What are the characteristics of visualization tool, which would enable testing with real users. real requirements data? How does the performance of computation scale up? The applied research methodology follows Design Science in the sense that the aim is to innovate a novel approach and bring it 1 Introduction into a specific new environment so that the results have value in the Over the years Issue