Next: 6.7 Alert Detection and
Up: 6.6 SUO Execution Monitoring
Previous: 6.6.5 Design tradeoffs
The EA responds to other requests, such as calls for fire,
which are described in Section 6.7.
Several other capabilities were implemented to make the EA easier to use and
understand. Two are briefly mentioned here.
We implemented a GUI, not meant for military users, but rather to facilitate
evaluation and understanding of the EA. The GUI displays all alerts in
different scrollable windows for each priority level, the current time, and
the current mission of each subordinate of the EA owner.
The user can confirm mission starts and ends locally, although this might be
done with voice or some other modality in a fielded system. When a
confirmation arrives from a subordinate EA, the confirmation window for that
mission is destroyed. Thus, confirmations and prompts can be given locally
or received in messages, with a seamless interleaving of those two types of
confirmation.
The EA, PA, mission model, PRS and SIPE-2 are
implemented in COMMON LISP, CLIM, and CLOS. The EA also contains procedural
knowledge in the form of Acts. SAIM was implemented in C++ and Java, using
the ACE Object Request Broker for CORBA. C++ was used to interface the EA
to SAIM and CORBA.
Next: 6.7 Alert Detection and
Up: 6.6 SUO Execution Monitoring
Previous: 6.6.5 Design tradeoffs
Pauline Berry
2003-03-18