Content-Centric Prototyping of Generative AI Applications: Emerging Approaches and Challenges in Collaborative Software Teams

Generative AI models are increasingly powering software applications, offering the capability to produce expressive content across varied contexts. However, unlike previous iterations of human-AI design, the emerging design process for generative capabilities primarily hinges on prompt engineering strategies. Given this fundamental shift in approach, our work aims to understand how collaborative software teams set up and apply design guidelines and values, iteratively prototype prompts, and evaluate prompts to achieve desired outcomes. We conducted design studies with 39 industry professionals, including designers, software engineers, and product managers. Our findings reveal a content-centric prototyping approach in which teams begin with the content they want to generate, then identify specific attributes, constraints, and values, and explore methods to give users the ability to influence and interact with those attributes. Based on associated challenges, such as the lack of model interpretability and overfitting the design to examples, we outline considerations for generative AI prototyping

Using artificial intelligence to find design errors in the engineering drawings

Artificial intelligence is increasingly becoming important to businesses because many companies have realized the benefits of applying machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) in their operations. ML and DL have become attractive technologies for organizations looking to automate repetitive tasks to reduce manual work and free up resources for innovation. Unlike rule-based automation, typically used for standardized and predictable processes, machine learning, especially deep learning, can handle more complex tasks and learn over time, leading to greater accuracy and efficiency improvements. One of such promising applications is to use AI to reduce manual engineering work. This paper discusses a particular case within McDermott where the research team developed a DL model to do a quality check of complex blueprints. We describe the development and the final product of this case—AI-based software for the engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) industry that helps to find the design mistakes buried inside very complex engineering drawings called piping and instrumentation diagrams (P&IDs). We also present a cost-benefit analysis and potential scale-up of the developed software. Our goal is to share the successful experience of AI-based product development that can substantially reduce the engineering hours and, therefore, reduce the project\u27s overall costs. The developed solution can also be potentially applied to other EPC companies doing a similar design for complex installations with high safety standards like oil and gas or petrochemical plants because the design errors it captures are common within this industry. It also could motivate practitioners and researchers to create similar products for the various fields within engineering industry

Chemical-Based Formulation Design: Virtual Experimentation

This paper presents a software, the virtual Product-Process Design laboratory (virtual PPD-lab) and the virtual experimental scenarios for design/verification of consumer oriented liquid formulated products where the software can be used. For example, the software can be employed for the design of the active ingredient-solvent mixture and/or their verification in terms of the product function. These consumer products are still primarily designed, developed and/or tested through experiment-based trial and error approaches. However, using the powerful methodologies and tools developed within the process system engineering community, it is possible now to replace, at least, some of the experimental steps with efficient and validated model-based approaches. For example, the search space can be significantly reduced through computer-aided screenings of the active ingredient (AI), the solvent mixture, the additives and/or their mixtures (formulations). Therefore, the experimental resources can focus on a few candidate product formulations to find the best product. The virtual PPD-lab allows various options for experimentations related to design and/or verification of the product. For example, the selection and verification of the functions of the AI; the design of solvent mixtures for the delivery of the AI; the stability test of the liquid formulated product; the selection of additives such as aroma compounds to be added to the products to enhance their quality; the generation of a list of candidate formulations; the addition of the missing chemicals to an incomplete formulation and the verification of the final product. The software is based on a framework that allows quick implementation of different design/verification work-flows and their associated models, methods, tools and data. The software contains a suite of databases with data of AIs used in different products (such as insect repellents), solvents classified in terms of special characteristics (such as solubility in water), and additives classified in terms of their application (such as aroma agents, wetting agents and preservatives). In addition, the software has built-in intelligence through implemented knowledge-bases related to transforming product attributes (consumer needs) to a set of physical-chemical properties; templates (work-flows) for specific product types are also available; guidance for property model (such as pure component properties and mixture properties) selection and adaptation is provided; the selection and use of models for product verification is also possible (such as stability of liquid and evaporation of the solvent after application of the product). Finally, the software has a collection of algorithms (such as CAMD, mixture design, model adaptation). All of the above helps to perform virtual experiments by blending chemicals together and observing their predicted behaviour. The paper will highlight the application of the virtual PPD-lab in the design and/or verification of different consumer products (paint formulation, hair spray, sunscreen lotion, insect repellent lotion). The results of the virtual experimentations will be illustrated through the (initial) base case designs that were obtained and their verification through real experiments and/or available product data analysis

Responsible-AI-by-Design: a Pattern Collection for Designing Responsible AI Systems

Although AI has significant potential to transform society, there are serious concerns about its ability to behave and make decisions responsibly. Many ethical regulations, principles, and guidelines for responsible AI have been issued recently. However, these principles are high-level and difficult to put into practice. In the meantime much effort has been put into responsible AI from the algorithm perspective, but they are limited to a small subset of ethical principles amenable to mathematical analysis. Responsible AI issues go beyond data and algorithms and are often at the system-level crosscutting many system components and the entire software engineering lifecycle. Based on the result of a systematic literature review, this paper identifies one missing element as the system-level guidance - how to design the architecture of responsible AI systems. We present a summary of design patterns that can be embedded into the AI systems as product features to contribute to responsible-AI-by-design

Generating Counterexamples of Model-based Software Product Lines: An Exploratory Study

International audienceModel-based Software Product Line (MSPL) engineering ai- ms at deriving customized models corresponding to individ- ual products of a family. MSPL approaches usually promote the joint use of a variability model, a base model expressed in a specific formalism, and a realization layer that maps variation points to model elements. The design space of an MSPL is extremely complex to manage for the engineer, since the number of variants may be exponential and the derived product models have to be conformant to numerous well-formedness and business rules. In this paper, the objec- tive is to provide a way to generate MSPLs, called counterex- amples, that can produce invalid product models despite a valid configuration in the variability model. We provide a systematic and automated process, based on the Common Variability Language (CVL), to randomly search the space of MSPLs for a specific formalism. We validate the effective- ness of this process for three formalisms at different scales (up to 247 metaclasses and 684 rules). We also explore and discuss how counterexamples could guide practitioners when customizing derivation engines, when implementing check- ing rules that prevent early incorrect CVL models, or simply when specifying an MSPL

Application of mutual information-based sequential feature selection to ISBSG mixed data

[EN] There is still little research work focused on feature selection (FS) techniques including both categorical and continuous features in Software Development Effort Estimation (SDEE) literature. This paper addresses the problem of selecting the most relevant features from ISBSG (International Software Benchmarking Standards Group) dataset to be used in SDEE. The aim is to show the usefulness of splitting the ranked list of features provided by a mutual information-based sequential FS approach in two, regarding categorical and continuous features. These lists are later recombined according to the accuracy of a case-based reasoning model. Thus, four FS algorithms are compared using a complete dataset with 621 projects and 12 features from ISBSG. On the one hand, two algorithms just consider the relevance, while the remaining two follow the criterion of maximizing relevance and also minimizing redundancy between any independent feature and the already selected features. On the other hand, the algorithms that do not discriminate between continuous and categorical features consider just one list, whereas those that differentiate them use two lists that are later combined. As a result, the algorithms that use two lists present better performance than those algorithms that use one list. Thus, it is meaningful to consider two different lists of features so that the categorical features may be selected more frequently. We also suggest promoting the usage of Application Group, Project Elapsed Time, and First Data Base System features with preference over the more frequently used Development Type, Language Type, and Development Platform.Fernández-Diego, M.; González-Ladrón-De-Guevara, F. (2018). Application of mutual information-based sequential feature selection to ISBSG mixed data. Software Quality Journal. 26(4):1299-1325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-017-9391-5S12991325264Angelis, L., & Stamelos, I. (2000). A simulation tool for efficient analogy based cost estimation. Empirical Software Engineering, 5(1), 35–68. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009897800559 .Auer, M., Trendowicz, A., Graser, B., Haunschmid, E., & Biffl, S. (2006). Optimal project feature weights in analogy-based cost estimation: improvement and limitations. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 32(2), 83–92.Awada, W., Khoshgoftaar, T. M., Dittman, D., Wald, R., Napolitano, A. (2012). A review of the stability of feature selection techniques for bioinformatics data. In 2012 I.E. 13th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI) (pp. 356–363). Presented at the 2012 I.E. 13th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI). https://doi.org/10.1109/IRI.2012.6303031 .Battiti, R. (1994). Using mutual information for selecting features in supervised neural net learning. Neural Networks, IEEE Transactions, 5(4), 537–550.Bennasar, M., Hicks, Y., & Setchi, R. (2015). Feature selection using joint mutual information maximisation. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(22), 8520–8532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.007 .Bibi, S., Tsoumakas, G., Stamelos, I., & Vlahavas, I. (2008). Regression via classification applied on software defect estimation. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(3), 2091–2101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.02.012 .Chandrashekar, G., & Sahin, F. (2014). A survey on feature selection methods. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 40(1), 16–28.Chatzipetrou, P., Papatheocharous, E., Angelis, L., Andreou, A. S. (2012). An investigation of software effort phase distribution using compositional data analysis. In 2012 38th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA) (pp. 367–375). Presented at the 2012 38th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA). https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA.2012.50 .Chen, Z., Menzies, T., Port, D., & Boehm, B. (2005). Feature subset selection can improve software cost estimation accuracy. In Proceedings of the 2005 workshop on predictor models in software engineering (pp. 1–6). New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1082983.1083171 .Chiu, N.-H., & Huang, S.-J. (2007). The adjusted analogy-based software effort estimation based on similarity distances. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(4), 628–640.Dash, M., & Liu, H. (2003). Consistency-based search in feature selection. Artificial Intelligence, 151(1), 155–176.Dejaeger, K., Verbeke, W., Martens, D., & Baesens, B. (2012). Data mining techniques for software effort estimation: a comparative study. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 38(2), 375–397. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2011.55 .Deng, K., & MacDonell, S. G. (2008). Maximising data retention from the ISBSG repository. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (pp. 21–30). Swinton: British Computer Society http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2227115.2227118 . Accessed 21 Jan 2014.Doquire, G., & Verleysen, M. (2011). An hybrid approach to feature selection for mixed categorical and continuous data. In International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval. http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/90765 . Accessed 2 Nov 2015.Dudani, S. A. (1976). The distance-weighted k-nearest-neighbor rule. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC, 6(4), 325–327. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1976.5408784 .Estévez, P. A., Tesmer, M., Perez, C. A., & Zurada, J. M. (2009). Normalized mutual information feature selection. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 20(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2008.2005601 .Fayyad, U.M., & Irani, K.B. (1993). Multi-Interval Discretization of Continuous-Valued Attributes for Classification Learning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Uncertainty in AI (pp. 1022–1027). Presented at the International Joint Conference on Uncertainty in AI. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220815890_Multi-Interval_Discretization_of_Continuous-Valued_Attributes_for_Classification_Learning . Accessed 22 June 2016.Fernández-Diego, M., & González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F. (2014). Potential and limitations of the ISBSG dataset in enhancing software engineering research: a mapping review. Information and Software Technology, 56(6), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2014.01.003 .Ferreira, A., & Figueiredo, M. (2011). Unsupervised joint feature discretization and selection. In J. Vitrià, J. M. Sanches, & M. Hernández (Eds.), Pattern recognition and image analysis (Vol. 6669, pp. 200–207). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-642-21257-4_25 . Accessed 4 Mar 2016.Fleuret, F. (2004). Fast binary feature selection with conditional mutual information. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 5, 1531–1555.González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F., Fernández-Diego, M., & Lokan, C. (2016). The usage of ISBSG data fields in software effort estimation: a systematic mapping study. Journal of Systems and Software, 113, 188–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.11.040 .Gupta, P., Jain, S., & Jain, A. (2014). A review of fast clustering-based feature subset selection algorithm. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 3(11), 86–91.Guyon, I., & Elisseeff, A. (2003). An introduction to variable and feature selection. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 1157–1182.Hall, M. A., & Holmes, G. (2003). Benchmarking attribute selection techniques for discrete class data mining. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 15(6), 1437–1447. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2003.1245283 .Hausser, J., & Strimmer, K. (2009). Entropy inference and the James-Stein estimator, with application to nonlinear gene association networks. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10(Jul), 1469–1484.Hill, P. (2010). Practical software project estimation: a toolkit for estimating software development effort & duration. McGraw Hill Professional.Hsu, H.-H., Hsieh, C.-W., & Lu, M.-D. (2011). Hybrid feature selection by combining filters and wrappers. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(7), 8144–8150.Huang, S.-J., & Chiu, N.-H. (2006). Optimization of analogy weights by genetic algorithm for software effort estimation. Information and Software Technology, 48(11), 1034–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2005.12.020 .Huang, S.-J., Chiu, N.-H., & Liu, Y.-J. (2008). A comparative evaluation on the accuracies of software effort estimates from clustered data. Information and Software Technology, 50(9–10), 879–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.02.005 .Huang, J., Li, Y.-F., & Xie, M. (2015). An empirical analysis of data preprocessing for machine learning-based software cost estimation. Information and Software Technology, 67, 108–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.07.004 .ISBSG. (2013a). ISBSG Dataset Release 12. ISBSG. http://isbsg.org/ . Accessed 1 Mar 2016.ISBSG. (2013b). ISBSG Guidelines Release 12.ISBSG. (2013c). ISBSG Data Demographics Release 12.Jeffery, R., Ruhe, M., Wieczorek, I. (2001). Using public domain metrics to estimate software development effort. In Software Metrics Symposium, 2001. METRICS 2001. Proceedings. Seventh International (pp. 16–27). https://doi.org/10.1109/METRIC.2001.915512 .Jiang, Z., & Comstock, C. (2007). The factors significant to software development productivity. In C. Ardil (Ed.), Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol 19 (Vol. 19, pp. 160–164). Presented at the Conference of the World-Academy-of-Science-Engineering-and-Technology, Bangkok: World Acad Sci, Eng & Tech-Waset.Jørgensen, M., Indahl, U., & Sjøberg, D. (2003). Software effort estimation by analogy and ‘regression toward the mean’. Journal of Systems and Software, 68(3), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(03)00066-9 .Kabir, M. M., Shahjahan, M., & Murase, K. (2011). A new local search based hybrid genetic algorithm for feature selection. Neurocomputing, 74(17), 2914–2928.Kadoda, G., Cartwright, M., Chen, L., Shepperd, M. (2000). Experiences using case-based reasoning to predict software project effort. In EASE 2000 (pp. 2–3). Presented at the EASE 2000, Staffordshire, UK.Keung, J., Kocaguneli, E., & Menzies, T. (2012). Finding conclusion stability for selecting the best effort predictor in software effort estimation. Automated Software Engineering, 20(4), 543–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10515-012-0108-5 .Kirsopp, C., Shepperd, M. J., Hart, J. (2002). Search heuristics, case-based reasoning and software project effort prediction. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (pp. 9–13). New York, USA. http://v-scheiner.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/1554 . Accessed 27 Jan 2016.Kohavi, R., & John, G. H. (1997). Wrappers for feature subset selection. Artificial Intelligence, 97(1–2), 273–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(97)00043-X .Kwak, N., & Choi, C.-H. (2002). Input feature selection for classification problems. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 13(1), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1109/72.977291 .Langdon, W. B., Dolado, J., Sarro, F., & Harman, M. (2016). Exact mean absolute error of baseline predictor, MARP0. Information and Software Technology, 73, 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2016.01.003 .Li, Y. F., Xie, M., & Goh, T. N. (2009). A study of mutual information based feature selection for case based reasoning in software cost estimation. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5921–5931.Liu, H., & Motoda, H. (2012). Feature selection for knowledge discovery and data mining (Vol. 454). Springer Science & Business Media. https://books.google.es/books?hl=en&lr=&id=aaDbBwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP10&dq=Feature+selection+for+knowledge+discovery+and+data+mining&ots=iuMhcWZGcf&sig=KlmNEIcsBdDVs-m1HUuICfpYZiM . Accessed 25 Jan 2016.Liu, H., & Yu, L. (2005). Toward integrating feature selection algorithms for classification and clustering. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17(4), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2005.66 .Liu, H., Wei, R., & Jiang, G. (2013). A hybrid feature selection scheme for mixed attributes data. Computational and Applied Mathematics, 32(1), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-013-0019-5 .Liu, Q., Wang, J., Xiao, J., Zhu, H. (2014). Mutual information based feature selection for symbolic interval data. In International Conference on Software Intelligence Technologies and Applications International Conference on Frontiers of Internet of Things 2014 (pp. 62–69). Presented at the International Conference on Software Intelligence Technologies and Applications International Conference on Frontiers of Internet of Things 2014. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2014.1537 .Lokan, C. (2005). What should you optimize when building an estimation model? In Software Metrics, 2005. 11th IEEE International Symposium (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1109/METRICS.2005.55 .Lokan, C., & Mendes, E. (2009a). Investigating the use of chronological split for software effort estimation. Software, IET, 3(5), 422–434. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2008.0107 .Lokan, C., & Mendes, E. (2009b). Applying moving windows to software effort estimation. In Proceedings of the 2009 3rd international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement (pp. 111–122). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2009.5316019 .Lokan, C., & Mendes, E. (2012). Investigating the use of duration-based moving windows to improve software effort prediction. In Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), 2012 19th Asia-Pacific (Vol. 1, pp. 818–827). Presented at the Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), 2012 19th Asia-Pacific. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2012.74 .Lustgarten, J.L., Visweswaran, S., Grover, H., Gopalakrishnan, V. (2008). An evaluation of discretization methods for learning rules from biomedical datasets. In BIOCOMP (pp. 527–532).Mandal, M., & Mukhopadhyay, A. (2013). An improved minimum redundancy maximum relevance approach for feature selection in gene expression data. Procedia Technology, 10, 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.12.332 .Mendes, E., Watson, I., Triggs, C., Mosley, N., & Counsell, S. (2003). A comparative study of cost estimation models for web hypermedia applications. Empirical Software Engineering, 8(2), 163–196.Mendes, E., Lokan, C., Harrison, R., Triggs, C. (2005). A replicated comparison of cross-company and within-company effort estimation models using the ISBSG database. In Software Metrics, 2005. 11th IEEE International Symposium (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1109/METRICS.2005.4 .Moses, J., Farrow, M., Parrington, N., & Smith, P. (2006). A productivity benchmarking case study using Bayesian credible intervals. Software Quality Journal, 14(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-006-6000-4 .Núñez, H., Sànchez-Marrè, M., Cortés, U., Comas, J., Martínez, M., Rodríguez-Roda, I., & Poch, M. (2004). A comparative study on the use of similarity measures in case-based reasoning to improve the classification of environmental system situations. Environmental Modelling & Software, 19(9), 809–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2003.03.003 .Oh, I.-S., Lee, J.-S., & Moon, B.-R. (2004). Hybrid genetic algorithms for feature selection. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 26(11), 1424–1437.Peng, H., Long, F., & Ding, C. (2005). Feature selection based on mutual information criteria of max-dependency, max-relevance, and min-redundancy. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 27(8), 1226–1238. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2005.159 .R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing https://www.R-project.org/ .Romanski, P., & Kotthoff, L. (2014). FSelector: Selecting attributes. R package version 0.20. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=FSelector .Shannon, C. E. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Shepperd, M., & MacDonell, S. (2012). Evaluating prediction systems in software project estimation. Information and Software Technology, 54(8), 820–827.Shepperd, M., & Schofield, C. (1997). Estimating software project effort using analogies. Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 23(11), 736–743.Somol, P., Pudil, P., & Kittler, J. (2004). Fast branch & bound algorithms for optimal feature selection. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on, 26(7), 900–912.Song, Q., & Shepperd, M. (2007). A new imputation method for small software project data sets. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(1), 51–62.Top, O. O., Ozkan, B., Nabi, M., Demirors, O. (2011). Internal and External Software Benchmark Repository Utilization for Effort Estimation. In Software Measurement, 2011 Joint Conference of the 21st Int’l Workshop on and 6th Int’l Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (IWSM-MENSURA) (pp. 302–307). https://doi.org/10.1109/IWSM-MENSURA.2011.41 .Vinh, L.T., Thang, N.D., Lee, Y.-K. (2010). An improved maximum relevance and minimum redundancy feature selection algorithm based on normalized mutual information. In 2010 10th IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT) (pp. 395–398). Presented at the 2010 10th IEEE/IPSJ International Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT). https://doi.org/10.1109/SAINT.2010.50 .Witten, I.H., Frank, E., Hall, M.A., Pal, C.J. (2011). Data mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques. Morgan Kaufmann

Aplicación de la inteligencia artificial en el desarrollo de software

Software development (SD) is a computer science area managered information processing, through the software products creation, design and deployment, which require a life cycle and the model implementation to determine a quality product. Also, software development processes generate a high failure rate, due to requirement specification, limited communication between the development team and the client, an inadequate application of methodologies and estimated time, what must be analyzed depth. With technological changes estableshed this last decade and the Artificial Intelligence (AI) advance, it is considered important to integrate these science two edges, what allow the a capable software product development of satisfying the customers needs, based onto art state technologies integration. For research project development, it was set a systematic literature review, based onto scientific information databases, its second phase is estableshed a Ecuciencia scientific platform case study to determine models, phases and set activities into AI algorithms software and the application development, and finally, it is designed a model to determine success factors, what allow the Artificial Intelligence and Software Engineering integration for developing complete programming solutions, through the next-generation models and algorithms applicationEl desarrollo de software (DS) es un área de las ciencias informáticas encargada del procesamiento de la información a través de la creación, diseño y despliegue de productos de software que requieren de un ciclo de vida y de la implementación de un modelo para determinar un producto de calidad. Los procesos de desarrollo de software generan también una alta tasa de fallo debido a la especificación de requerimientos, comunicación limitada entre el equipo de desarrollo y el cliente, una aplicación inadecuada de las metodologías y estimaciones de tiempo que deben ser analizadas a profundidad. Con los cambios tecnológicos establecidos en esta última década y el avance de la Inteligencia Artificial (IA) se considera importante la integración de estas dos aristas de la ciencia que permitan el desarrollo de un producto de software capaz de satisfacer las necesidades de los clientes con base a la integración de tecnologías de última generación. Para el desarrollo del proyecto de investigación se establece una revisión sistemática de literatura basado en bases de datos científicas de información, en sus segunda fase se establece un caso de estudio de la plataforma científica EcuCiencia para determinar modelos, fases y actividades establecidas en el desarrollo de software y la aplicación de algoritmos de IA y finalmente se diseña un modelo para determinar factores de éxito que permitan la integración de la Inteligencia Artificial y la Ingeniería de Software para desarrollar soluciones completas de programación a través de la aplicación de modelos y algoritmos de última generación

Development of a Coordinate Measuring Machine-Based Inspection Planning System for Industry 4.0

Industry 4.0 represents a new paradigm which creates new requirements in the area of manufacturing and manufacturing metrology such as to reduce the cost of product, flexibility, mass customization, quality of product, high level of digitalization, optimization, etc., all of which contribute to smart manufacturing and smart metrology systems. This paper presents a developed inspection planning system based on CMM as support of the smart metrology within Industry 4.0 or manufacturing metrology 4.0 (MM4.0). The system is based on the application of three AI techniques such as engineering ontology (EO), GA and ants colony optimization (ACO). The developed system consists of: the ontological knowledge base; the mathematical model for generating strategy of initial MP; the model of analysis and optimization of workpiece setups and probe configuration; the path simulation model in MatLab, PTC Creo and STEP-NC Machine software, and the model of optimization MP by applying ACO. The advantage of the model is its suitability for monitoring of the measurement process and digitalization of the measurement process planning, simulation carried out and measurement verification based on CMM, reduction of the preparatory measurement time as early as in the inspection planning phase and minimizing human involvement or human errors through intelligent planning, which directly influences increased production efficiency, competitiveness, and productivity of enterprises. The measuring experiment was performed using a machined prismatic workpiece (PW)

Development of a Coordinate Measuring Machine-Based Inspection Planning System for Industry 4.0

Industry 4.0 represents a new paradigm which creates new requirements in the area of manufacturing and manufacturing metrology such as to reduce the cost of product, flexibility, mass customization, quality of product, high level of digitalization, optimization, etc., all of which contribute to smart manufacturing and smart metrology systems. This paper presents a developed inspection planning system based on CMM as support of the smart metrology within Industry 4.0 or manufacturing metrology 4.0 (MM4.0). The system is based on the application of three AI techniques such as engineering ontology (EO), GA and ants colony optimization (ACO). The developed system consists of: the ontological knowledge base; the mathematical model for generating strategy of initial MP; the model of analysis and optimization of workpiece setups and probe configuration; the path simulation model in MatLab, PTC Creo and STEP-NC Machine software, and the model of optimization MP by applying ACO. The advantage of the model is its suitability for monitoring of the measurement process and digitalization of the measurement process planning, simulation carried out and measurement verification based on CMM, reduction of the preparatory measurement time as early as in the inspection planning phase and minimizing human involvement or human errors through intelligent planning, which directly influences increased production efficiency, competitiveness, and productivity of enterprises. The measuring experiment was performed using a machined prismatic workpiece (PW)