Managing Quality of Context in Pervasive Computing Yingyi Bu, Shaxun Chen, Xianping Tao, Jun Li and Jian Lu Department of Computer Science & Technology, Nanjing University Tao Gu Institute For Infocomm Research, Singapore Outline Introduction Related work Quality measurement of context Context model Context Management Mechanism Evaluations Case Study Conclusions Introduction Context awareness A major software type in pervasive computing environment Quality of software in pervasive computing Quality of program Quality of document Quality of context Motivating example I’m a context-aware music player, and play Jazz for you. Oh, I don’t want Jazz now! I want classical music! Context Mismatching A serious quality issue in current contextaware software system Context in real world ≠ context in computer’s view What could we do? To make context in computers approximate context in real world! Related work Existing context-aware middleware: SOCAM (IEEE pervasive computing) CoBrA (IEEE internet computing) CARISMA (IEEE trans. software engineering) Active campus (ICSE 2003) MobiPADs (IEEE trans. software engineering) ……. Weakness of those systems Don’t pay enough attention to quality of context. In fact, lower quality of context may make users unpleasant. Work for quality of context Dey, et al. gave a novel solution for ambiguity resolution by user mediation. (ACM TOCHI) Throw the responsibility of maintain quality of context to users. Work for quality of context Xu et, al. established a context consistency management mechanism (ESEC/FSE 2005) providing a middleware architecture for inconsistency detection and resolution Work for quality of context Xu et, al. proposes an context consistency checking mechanism (ICSE 2006) Incremental consistency checking Our contribution Propose quality measures for context Establish a formulated context model Use ontology based context consistency checking Resolve context inconsistency automatically Shorten the delay of context delivering Quality measures for context Delay Time the time interval between the time when the situation happens in real world and the time when the situation is recognized in computers. Quality measures for context Context Correctness Probability The accuracy rate of sensed data What is the percent of context correct matching Quality measures for context Context Consistency Probability the probability that contexts in computers are consistent “Dr.Gu in laboratory” and “Dr.Gu at home” are two inconsistent contexts We use the 3 quality measures as our design principles Context Model Ontology Entity person, desk, classroom, meeting room, and campus Relationship a set of shared vocabularies of concepts and the interrelationships among these concepts the situations or predicates about entities Dependency the dependent relationship between “Relationship” Example Formulate to graph model Context graph Context ER-graph Dependency graph Context repository (see Section4.2 for details) Context management mechanism Context processing procedure Inconsistency resolution in raw context level Raw level refactoring in context repository Context reasoning and context repository updating Context processing procedure Inconsistency resolution in raw context level Definition: Conflict Pair Set Conflict pair set, is a set consisting of pairs such as (edgea, edgeb), in which corresponding contexta(contains edgea) conflicts with contextb(contains edgeb). Definition: Conflict Set For a given edge set denoted as EdgeSet, if its members conflict with each other, we call EdgeSet a conflict set. Inconsistency resolution in raw context level Definition: Relative Frequency−rf A formula that calculates the rf value of a raw-edge edgei is shown as follow: RCIR algorithm Raw level refactoring in context repository Why? Before context reasoning, the context repository should be updated in order to ensure incorrect or outdated highlevel contexts are removed. RLR algorithm Context reasoning and context repository updating Use rule reasoning and ontology reasoning orderly Update context repository (similar to raw level refactoring) Evaluations – performance study Evaluations – effectiveness study Application Case study Smart office scenario FollowMe Infrastructure Web Server Meeting Room download slide Office Room upload slide show warning Stranger edit slide Tom Effect Implementations We implement 3 versions With a simplified quality management (SIR) With inconsistency resolution on high level contexts (CIR) With context management mechanism in this work (RCIR) Error rate comparison Conclusions Context quality measures Context model Context management mechanism Evaluations Case study Future work Further improvement on quality of context A theoretical model for quality of context Reference H. Chen, T.W. Finin, A. Joshi, and L. K. F. Intelligent agents meet the semantic web in smart spaces. IEEE Internet Computing, pages 69–79, November 2004. A. K. Dey and J.Mankoff. Designing mediation for context-aware applications. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction(TOCHI), 12(1):53–80, 2005. W. G. Griswold, R. S. Boyer, S. W. Brown, and T. M. Truong. A component architecture for an extensible, highly integrated context-aware computing infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE2003), Portland, Oregon, USA, pages 363–373. IEEE Computer Society, 2003. T. Gu, H. K. Pung, and D. Q. Zhang. Towards an osgibased infrastructure for context-aware applications in smart homes. IEEE Pervasive Computing, pages 66–74, December 2004. L. D. Harvel, L. Liu, G. D. Abowd, Y.-X. Lim, C. Scheibe, and C. Chatham. Context cube: Flexible and effective manipulation of sensed context data. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Pervasive Computing (PERVASIVE 2004), Vienna, Austria, volume 3001 of LNCS, pages 51–68. Springer, 2004. Reference J. I. Hong and J. Landa. An infrastructure approach to context-aware computing. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Journal, 16, 2001. X. Jiang, N. Y. Chen, J. I. Hong, K.Wang, L. Takayama, and J. A. Landay. Siren: Context-aware computing for firefighting. In Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Pervasive Computing(PERVASIVE2004), Vienna, Austria, pages 87–105, 2004. J. Myllymaki and S. Edlund. Location aggregation from multiple sources. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM 2002), Singapore, January 8-11, 2002, pages 131–138. IEEE ComputerSociety, 2002. [16] A. Ranganathan, J. Al-Muhtadi, and R. H. Campbell. Reasoning about uncertain contexts in pervasive computing environments. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 03(2):62–70, 2004. [17] D. Salber, A. K. Dey, and G. D. Abowd. The context toolkit: Aiding the development of context-enabled applications. In Proceeding of the CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: The CHI is the Limit (CHI99), Pittsburgh, PA, USA. ACM, 1999, pages 434–441, 1999. Reference C. Xu and S.-C. Cheung. Inconsistency detection and resolution for contextaware middleware support. In Proceedings of the Joint 10th European Software Engineering Conference and 13th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2005), Lisbon,Portugal, pages 336–345, September 5-9 2005. C. Xu, S.-C. Cheung, and W. K. Chan. Incremental consistency checking for pervasive context. In 28th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2006), Shanghai,China, May 20-28, 2006, pages 292– 301, 2006. L. Capra,W. Emmerich, and C. Mascolo. Carisma: Contexta-ware reflective middleware system for mobile applications. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 29(10):929–945, 2003. A. T. Chan and S.-N. Chuang. Mobipads: A reflective middleware for context-aware mobile computing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 29:1072–1085, December 2003. G. Chen and D. Kotz. Policy-driven data dissemination for context-aware applications. In Proceedings of 3rd IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom2005), Kauai Island, HI, USA, pages283–289, 2005.