cis 895 – mse p roject cooperative robotics organization simulator (cros) presentation 1 on mar 1...
Post on 26-Dec-2015
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CIS 895 – MSE PROJECT
Cooperative Robotics Organization Simulator
(CROS)
Presentation 1 on Mar 1st, 2011
Daniel Christopher Greenedgreene@ksu.edu
1
OUTLINE Terms Project Overview
Motivation Goal Purpose Block Diagrams and Data Flow Diagrams
Project Requirements Project Schedule Cost Estimation Software Quality Assurance Plan Prototype Demonstration Questions / Comments 2
TERMS Cooperative Robotics Organization
Simulator (CROS) A tool for testing organization models in
multiagent systems. Multiagent & Cooperative Robotics
(MACR) A group headed by Dr. Scott DeLoach whose
primary focus is organization-based multiagent systems.
3
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Motivation Simulation should be as realistic as possible while
maintaining abstraction. Hex Grids allow more degrees of freedom without distorting
distance.
4
PROJECT OVERVIEW (CONT.)
Goal To update the CROS framework
Objects to display in a hex-grid Capabilities updated to work in a hex-grid
5
PROJECT OVERVIEW (CONT.) Purpose
To test organization models in a multiagent system
To have agents with more degrees of freedom To have capabilities with more realistic
evaluation of distance.
6
SQUARE GRID VS. HEX GRID
7
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
8
SYSTEM OVERVIEW (CONT)
9
USE CASE DIAGRAM
10
DATA FLOW
11
PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
Requirements broken into 3 sections GUI Requirements Simulator Requirements Wumpi World Requirements
Each section has it’s own identifier and numbering system
Each requirement has an associated build release noted in the Vision Plan
12
GUI REQUIREMENTS
GUIRI 1 [CR] - The GUI will display objects in a hex-grid format.
GUIRI 2 - The image assets associated with various applications should be redrawn/resized to fit in hexagon.
CR stands for Critical Requirement
13
ORGANIZATION SIMULATOR REQUIREMENTS OSRI 1 [CR] - Update the Directions class to handle Hex directions. OSRI 2 [CR] - Update the AbstractAgent class to be able to handle
the Hex directions. OSRI 3 [CR] - Update the LocationData class to compute distance
with Hex-grid coordinates. OSRI 4 [CR] - Update the Gripper to be able to grab any of the 6
neighboring cells. OSRI 5 [CR] - Update the Heat Sensor to be able to sense ranged
hex-grid. OSRI 6 [CR] - Update Holonomic Movement to allow hex-grid
movement. OSRI 7 [CR] - Update the Laser Range Finder to compute range
with hex-grid coordinates. OSRI 8 [CR] - Update the Sonar to be able to sense ranged hex-
grid. OSRI 9 [CR] - Update the Sonar to be able to compute line of sight
for hex-grid. OSRI 10 [CR] - Update Steered Movement to follow hex-grid
movement. CR stands for Critical Requirement
14
WUMPI WORLD REQUIREMENTS WWRI 1 [CR] - Update the Wumpi to claw in 6 directions. WWRI 2 [CR] - Update Bazooka to shoot in 6 directions. WWRI 3 [CR] - Update Breeze Sensor for 6 adjacent cells. WWRI 4 [CR] - Update Gold Grabber to drop gold in any of the 6
adjacent cells, or same cell. WWRI 5 [CR] - Update Robot Movement to allow for 6 directions. WWRI 6 [CR] - Update Smell Sensor to detect wumpi in range of 2
hex-grids. WWRI 7 [CR] - Update Sparkle Sensor to detect gold in any of the 6
adjacent cells, or same cell. WWRI 8 - Update Demo Robot to demo HEX-GRID capabilities.
CR stands for Critical Requirement
15
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Key Dates Presentation 1: March 1st, 2011
Basic Prototype
Presentation 2: March 29th, 2011 Redesigned Architecture Prototype using proposed architecture
Presentation 3: April 26th, 2011 Finish Reimplementing Capabilities Polish Simulator Back-end
16
PROJECT SCHEDULE
17
COST ESTIMATION MODEL
COCOMO II : The Post-Architecture Model Is used before we start developing the
architecture
COCOMO II is chosen as it considers important factors like Reliability Software Development Complexity Database and Memory Usage Etc.
18
COST ESTIMATION FORMULAE
Effort = 2.94 * EAF * (KSLOC) E
Time = (3.67*(Effort)F)*SCHED%/100 E = B + 0.01*SF = 0.91 + 0.01*SF F = (0.28 + 0.2*[E – 0.91])
Effort = Number of person months (PM) Time = Duration time in months for project KSLOC = Estimated number of source lines of
code for the project (expressed in thousands)
SF = Scale Factor EAF = Effort Adjustment Factor 19
SCALE FACTORS
Identifier Classification Value Reasoning
PREC Very High 1.00Familiarity with the project framework and applications based on it.
FLEX Extra High 0.00 The implementation is very flexible.
RESL High 2.83 Some tools/methodologies available for Risk Resolution
TEAM Very High 1.10Stakeholders and Developer(s) highly cooperative.
PMAT High 3.12 Fairly Mature Process
20
EFFORT ADJUSTMENT FACTORSIdentifier Classification Value Reasoning
RELY Very Low 0.82Project is not safety critical, and does not need to run for extensive periods of time.
DATA Low 1.00 Data is domain specific. Only data necessary is configuration file.
CPLX Nominal 1.00 Complex system. Abstracted enough to make applications simple.
RUSE Nominal 1.00 The changes must be met for the current project.
DOCU High 1.10 Documentation must be met to match the rest of the project.
TIME Nominal 1.00 Simulation won’t be needing 50% Execution Time
STOR Nominal 1.00 Constraints limited by JVM and application specific
PVOL Low 0.87 Major changes to platform not frequent.
ACAP Nominal 1.00 Some experience with High level design.
21
EFFORT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS (CONT)
Identifier Classification Value Reasoning
PCAP Nominal 0.90 Developer is highly versatile and capable
PCON Very High .81 Personnel Continuity – Very low turnover
AEXP High 0.88 Developer has worked with similar applications for several years.
PLEX HIGH 0.91 Developer has several years with the platforms used
LTEX HIGH 0.91 Developer has 4+ years experience with Java, and a few years with other software engineering tools
TOOL Nominal 1.00 Some tools have some Lifecycle integration
SITE Very High 0.86 All parties responsible for the project are in the same building
SCED Nominal 1.00 Project is tightly scheduled but is a bit flexible
22
COST ESTIMATION CALCULATIONS
KSLOC estimated at: 1.5 Based on experience with CROS framework and
number of capabilities SF = 8.05
E = 0.99 F = 0.30
EAF = 0.36
Effort = 1.58 person months Time = 4.21 chronological months
Result: Project should be able to be accomplished in 1 semester.
23
SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN References
Vision Plan Project Plan IEEE Standard for Software Quality Assurance Planning IEEE Guide for Software Quality Assurance Planning
Supervisory Committee Dr. Scott A. DeLoach Dr. William H. Hsu Dr. David A. Gustafson
Major Professor Dr. William H. Hsu
Developer Daniel C. Greene
Formal Technical Inspectors TBD TBD
24
SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CONT.)
Documentation A listing of the required documentation is
available at: http://mse.cis.ksu.edu/portfolio.htm
Project Documentation will be available at : http://people.cis.ksu.edu/~dgreene/Projects/cis895
MSE Portfolio/
25
SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CONT.)
Standards, Practices, Conventions & Metrics Documentation – IEEE standards will be followed
for all applicable documentation Coding – Java coding standards Metrics – COCOMO II will be used to measure
project effort Reviews & Audits
Supervisory committee will review all documentation at each milestone
Formal Technical Inspectors will review the architecture before the second presentation
26
SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CONT.)
Testing Defined in Software Test Plan
Will be available by Presentation 2 Outputs of each capability manually checked
Problem Reporting Issues will be logged in a spreadsheet All issues will be reported to Major Professor
27
SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CONT.)
Tools, Technologies and Methodologies Eclipse IDE – for software development Java – for software development Microsoft Word – for documentation development Microsoft Excel – for risk and problem report
tracking and time logs Microsoft PowerPoint – for project presentation
creation Microsoft Project – for drawing the Gantt chart
(project planning) Visual Paradigm – for software design development Microsoft Paint – for any quick sketches/image
changes necessary JUnit – for testing the java code
28
SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN (CONT.)
Code and Media Control gForge CVS for versioning control Change logs will be maintained for all documents Versions of documentation will be maintained on
the developer’s computer
29
IMPLEMENTATION CHOICES
1) Replace Square-Grid System entirely with Hex-Grid Simple Don’t have to worry about flexibility
2) Add Hex-Grid System along-side Square-Grid System Developer can choose which system to work with Architecture mirror
3) Refactor Architecture to allow a Direction Interface Can decide which to use at Application level A bit more work to refactor 30
PROTOTYPE DEMONSTRATION
Wumpi World Shows agent moving in a Hex-Grid
31
PHASE 2 DELIVERABLES
Vision Plan 2.0 Project Plan 2.0 Architectural Design Document Software Test Plan 1.0 Technical Inspection List Presentation 2 Prototype 2.0 Source Code
Partial Implementation of Wumpi World
32
TO-DO LIST
Revise the Documents Revise Project Schedule Redesign Simulator Architecture? Implement Hex-based Capabilities
33
34
QUESTIONS?
top related