reconsidering the social web of things (position paper)

Reconsidering the Social Web of Things(Position Paper)

Andrei Ciortea1,2 Olivier Boissier1 Antoine Zimmermann1

Adina Florea2

1Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines, FAYOL-ENSMSE, LSTI, Saint-Etienne,France

2University ”Politehnica” of Bucharest, Romania

4th International Workshop on the Web of ThingsSeptember 9, 2013

1 On the Evolution of the WebSocialnessPervasivenessWhen Social meets PervasivePro-activeness

2 Towards a Social Web of ThingsVisionObjective and MotivationChallenges

3 A Layered Model for the SWoT

Reconsidering the Social Web of Things (Position Paper) 2/27

On the Evolution of the Web Towards a Social Web of Things A Layered Model for the SWoT Conclusions

Socialness

Pervasiveness

WoT [Guinard, 2011]

Webinos

When Social meets Pervasive

WoT [Guinard, 2011]

Webinos

[Guinard et al., 2010]

[Kranz et al., 2010]

Ericsson Research

Pro-activeness

I’m a Web userand I consume

content.

I’m a Web userand I write

my own Web.

• Web technologies enabled users to be proactive on the Web.

• Exciting times ahead: semantic Web Technologies, Linked DataPlatform, Push API, WebRTC, CoAP, etc.

• How about things?

Pro-activeness

content.

my own Web.

Pro-activeness

content.

my own Web.

Pro-activeness

content.

my own Web.

Pro-activeness

content.

my own Web.

Pro-activeness

content.

my own Web.

Pro-activeness

• Properties of agents (the weak notion of agency) [Wooldridge et al.,

1995]:

• social ability;• reactivity;• autonomy;• pro-activeness: the ability to exhibit goal-driven behavior by taking

the initiative.

• Multi-agent systems [Boissier, 2012]:

EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT

op2op1

op2op1 op2

op2op1

Environment

Interaction

op2op1

Pro-activeness

1995]:

the initiative.

op2op1

op2op1 op2

op2op1

Environment

Interaction

op2op1

Pro-activeness

1995]:

the initiative.

missionscheme

op2op1

op2op1 op2

op2op1

Environment

Organization

Interaction

op2op1

Pro-activeness

1995]:

the initiative.

missionscheme

op2op1

op2op1 op2

op2op1

Environment

Organization

Interaction

op2op1

Vision

Pervasiveness

Web of Things

Socialness

Web of People

Pro-activeness

Web of Agents

Social Webof Things

(SWoT)

Objective and Motivation

• Placing autonomous and proactive things on the Web.

• Where to start?• Extend and transform social networks into socio-technical

networks (STN) by introducing autonomous and proactivethings as full-fledged users and service providers.

• Such a STN would be suitable for:• providing a good experience to the WoT user (straightforward

model of interaction);• extending the perception of things by tapping into the rich

amount of information being published on social networks;• providing a framework for the development of complex WoT

applications.

Challenges

• Enable things as active participants in an open set of socialnetworks.

• Enable things to reason and make decisions in achieving theirgoals.

• Enable control over the autonomy of things and enhancecoordination towards achieving goals.

Challenges

A Layered Approach

Application

Organizational

Social

Agency

RESTful WoT APIDevices addressable through IRIsRESTful API for the WoTIdentification and representation of things

The Agency Layer

Application

Organizational

Social

AgencyAgentsAgent architecture: simple model, reactive, cognitive, etc.Integration with APIs of social networking services.

The Agency Layer

Agents as individuals

Hey washing machine,do my laundry!

Washing.

Donewashing.

• Connectivity: Integration at the level of the social networking service(SNS).

• Relationship management: Hardcoded in the agent.

• Decision-making: Based on agent’s knowledge.

• Coordination mechanisms: Hardcoded in the agent.

• Control of autonomy: Application-level.

The Agency Layer

Washing.

Donewashing.

The Agency Layer

Washing.

Donewashing.

The Agency Layer

Washing.

Donewashing.

The Agency Layer

Washing.

Donewashing.

The Social Layer

Application

Organizational

SocialAgents in social structures

AgencyAgentsAgent architecture: simple model, reactive, cognitive, etc.Decision-making based on individual knowledge.

The Social Layer

• What would a STN look like?

• The Socio-technical Graph (STG) is an edge-labeled directedmultigraph.

• Uniform interface: the set of common relevant nouns in SNSs.

The Social Layer

Agents in social structures

What is the currentpower consumption

in the building?

Some bigvalue!

John, would it be okto wait a bit?

• Connectivity: Access to an open set of social networks.

• Decision-making: Based on collective knowledge.

The Social Layer

in the building?

Some bigvalue!

The Social Layer

in the building?

Some bigvalue!

The Social Layer

in the building?

Some bigvalue!

The Social Layer

in the building?

Some bigvalue!

The Social Layer

in the building?

Some bigvalue!

The Social Layer

Application

Organizational

SocialAgents in social structuresAccess to an open set of social networks.Decision-making based on collective knowledge.

The Organizational Layer

Application

OrganizationalAgents in organizations

Agents in organizations

• Organizational models: AGR [Ferber et al., 2004], MOISE+[Hubner et al., 2007], OperA [Dignum, 2004], etc.

• Organizations can enable control on 3 dimensions: structural,communication, and functional.

• A SWoT app for student houses:• Setting:

• 6 floors;• 20 studios and 1 laundry room per floor;• 1 washing machine and 1 dryer per laundry room.

• Objectives:• Enhance interaction among students.• Improve the QoS of the laundromats.

Structural control

Hello StudentHouse!I’m Joe’s door

and I’m enactingrole Door in

group 3rd floor.

Hello Joe’s door!In this student

house, all Doorsare connected.

• The structural specification can encourage or discourageconnections in the STG.

Structural control

group 3rd floor.

Structural control

group 3rd floor.

Structural control

group 3rd floor.

Structural control

group 3rd floor.

Communication control

Door, I’m going to throwa party on my floor!

All Doors in3rd floor, Joe is

throwing a party!

Woohoo!:(

• Placing information in the appropriate context.• Object-centered communication.

throwing a party!

Woohoo!:(

throwing a party!

Woohoo!:(

throwing a party!

Woohoo!:(

throwing a party!

Woohoo!:(

Functional control

You will have tocheck out the demo

for this one! ;)

• Coordination mechanisms through top-down specifications oforganizational processes.

Functional control

for this one! ;)

Functional control

for this one! ;)

• Agents in organizations

• Connectivity: Access to an open set of social networks.• Relationship management: Can be enforced at the organizational

level.• Decision-making: Based on collective and organizational knowledge.• Coordination mechanisms: Organizational proceses (e.g. goal

decomposition trees).• Control of autonomy: Organization-level.

Application

OrganizationalAgents in organizationsControl and coordination at the organization-level.Decision-making based on organizational knowledge.

The Application Layer

ApplicationStandards, protocols and mechanismsManagement of services, content and social platformresources.

OrganizationalAgents in organizationsControl and coordination at the organization-level.Decision-making based on organizational knowledge.

• We have offered an interpretation on the evolution of the Webfrom several perspectives: socialness, pervasiveness, andpro-activeness.

• We have defined and motivated our vision for the SWoT atthe convergence of these 3 dimensions.

• We have discussed a possible approach towards implementingthis vision, introducing a layer of normative organizations for:

• bringing more autonomy to things;• enabling control over the autonomy of things;• supporting coordinated behavior in SWoT apps.

Thank you!

Olivier Boissier. Multi-agent oriented programming and intelligent environments. Invited talk, 20th EuropeanConference on Artificial Intelligence, 2012. URLhttp://2012.ai4ie.de/presentations/ai4ie_boissier.pdf.

MV Dignum. A model for organizational interaction: based on agents, founded in logic. 2004.

Jacques Ferber, Olivier Gutknecht, and Fabien Michel. From agents to organizations: an organizational view ofmulti-agent systems. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering IV, pages 214–230. Springer, 2004.

Dominique Guinard. A Web of Things Application Architecture: Integrating the Real-world Into the Web. PhDthesis, 2011.

Dominique Guinard, Mathias Fischer, and Vlad Trifa. Sharing using social networks in a composable web of things.In Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOM Workshops), 2010 8th IEEE InternationalConference on, pages 702–707. IEEE, 2010.

Jomi F Hubner, Jaime S Sichman, and Olivier Boissier. Developing organised multiagent systems using the moise+model: programming issues at the system and agent levels. International Journal of Agent-Oriented SoftwareEngineering, 1(3):370–395, 2007.

Matthias Kranz, Luis Roalter, and Florian Michahelles. Things that twitter: social networks and the internet ofthings. In What can the Internet of Things do for the Citizen (CIoT) Workshop at The Eighth InternationalConference on Pervasive Computing (Pervasive 2010), 2010.

Michael Wooldridge, Nicholas R Jennings, et al. Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. Knowledge engineeringreview, 10(2):115–152, 1995.

reconsidering the social web of things (position paper)

Technology

web user

semantic web technologies

web socialness pervasiveness

layered model

social meets pervasive

swot conclusions socialness

swot conclusions pervasiveness

paper andrei ciortea1