decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
Another Patent Infringement Claim Against Red Hat and JBoss
Friday, March 30 2012 @ 08:00 PM EDT

Yesterday Red Hat announced that it had gone over the $1 billion in revenue for its fiscal year ending February 29, 2012, making it the first open source company to accomplish this milestone. (Red Hat hits $1 billion in revenue, a milestone for open source) My first reaction was this will mark an increase in the number of patent infringement actions the company faces, and sure enough, a new one was filed yesterday.

A company called Business Process Modeling Solutions LLC, doing business as DE-BPMS LLC, filed suit against Red Hat (and a separate suit against IBM) asserting infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,873,094 (Text of Patent). (Complaint [PDF; Text])

The complaint focus on Claim 5 of the patent, which reads:

5. An expected behavior control system for detecting and correcting a behavior of an information model, the information model defining a process flow for a software application and being executable in a process flow control engine to perform actions having expected behaviors, comprising:

an expected behavior function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for detecting if an action executed by the information model provides an expected behavior in accordance with at least one expected behavior rule defining the expected behavior resulting from the executed action of the information model; and

a corrective action function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for executing at least one corrective action on the information model to correct behavior of the information model in response to detection of unexpected behavior of the information model by the expected behavior function.

This strikes me as just the type of claim that will have trouble under the Bilski standard, but it certainly wouldn't hurt to see what can be found in terms of prior art. This patent was filed July 3, 1997, but it claims priority back to a filing made April 11, 1995, so prior art must pre-date this earlier priority date.

Let us know what you are able to find.

Skip To Comments


**************

Documents

Complaint

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION

BUSINESS PROCESS MODELING
SOLUTIONS LLC d/b/a DE-BPMS LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
RED HAT, INC.,
Defendant.

Case No: 3:12-cv-00999

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT
INFRINGEMENT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Plaintiff Business Process Modeling Solutions LLC d/b/a DE-BPMS LLC brings this action against Red Hat, Inc., and for its causes of action alleges as follows:

THE PARTIES

1. Business Process Modeling Solutions LLC d/b/a DE-BPMS LLC (“BPMS”) is a Delaware limited liability company having its principal place of business at 500 Newport Center Drive, 7th Floor, Newport Beach, California, 92660 and maintains an office at 6136 Frisco Square Blvd., Suite 385, Frisco, Texas 75034.

2. Red Hat, Inc. (“RED HAT”) is, upon information and belief, a North Carolina corporation having its principal place of business at 1801 Varsity Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina 27606.

3. BPMS is the exclusive licensee of U.S. Patent No. 5,873,094 entitled, “Method and Apparatus for Automated Conformance and Enforcement of Behavior in Application Processing Systems” (“the ‘094 patent”), having all substantial rights in and to the ‘094 patent, including the right to recover damages for past, present, and future infringement. The ‘094 patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

1


4. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 282, the ‘094 patent is presumed valid.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 United States Code, particularly §§ 271 and 281. This Court has jurisdiction over the claim for patent infringement under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 6. Personal jurisdiction exists generally over RED HAT because it has sufficient minimum contacts with the forum as a result of business conducted within the State of Texas and within the Northern District of Texas. Personal jurisdiction also exists over RED HAT because it, directly or through subsidiaries and/or intermediaries, makes, uses, sells, and offers for sale, products and/or services within the State of Texas and within the Northern District of Texas, that infringe the ‘094 patent.

7. RED HAT maintains an office in the Northern District of Texas, which is located at 1501 LBJ Freeway, Fenton Centre, Suite 200, Dallas, Texas 75234. Upon information and belief, RED HAT provides sales, services, support, training and/or consulting for RED HAT’s Linux operating systems, JBoss Application Server in conjunction with Project Riftsaw, as well as Virtualization and Cloud product offerings, among other things, in the Northern District of Texas.

8. Dr. Kirit K. Talati is the named inventor of the ‘094 patent and resides in the Northern District of Texas. Dr. Talati holds a Ph.D. in Mathematics from Texas Christian University. Among other things, Dr. Talati is a pioneer in hardware and software virtualization technology.

9. Venue is proper in this Court under Title 28 United States Code §§ 1391(b) and (c) and 1400(b).

2


COUNT I: INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 5,873,094

10. RED HAT has been and is now making, using, selling, offering for sale within the United States, or importing into the United States, the JBoss Application Server in conjunction with Project Riftsaw (together the “JBoss Application Server”) that infringes at least claim 5 of the ‘094 patent.

11. By so making, using, selling, offering to sell the JBoss Application Server within the United States, or importing into the United States the aforementioned product, RED HAT has directly infringed and continues to infringe the ‘094 patent, either literally or by equivalents.

12. At least since the serving of the complaint in this lawsuit, RED HAT will have had actual knowledge of the ‘094 patent as a matter of law.

13. Since becoming aware of the ‘094 patent, RED HAT has continued to intentionally, actively, and knowingly both advertise about and sell, or offer to sell, the JBoss Application Server at least through the websites, RedHat.com and/or JBoss.org.

14. Upon information and belief, since becoming aware of the ‘094 patent, RED HAT has intentionally, knowingly, and actively provided continuing support services to end-users of the JBoss Application Server.

15. Since becoming aware of the ‘094 patent, RED HAT’s said advertising, support services, and sales have intentionally, actively, and knowingly contained and continue to contain instructions, directions, suggestions, and/or invitations that intentionally, actively, and knowingly invite, entice, lead on, influence, prevail on, move by persuasion, cause, and/or influence the public, RED HAT’s distributors, RED HAT’s retailers, RedHat.com and/or JBoss.org website users, customers, and/or end users to make, use, sell, and/or offer to sell the JBoss Application

3


Server, and/or practice the inventions claimed in the ‘094 patent, and thus directly infringe, either literally or by equivalents, at least claim 5 of the ‘094 patent.

16. Since becoming aware of the ‘094 patent, RED HAT was willfully blind, knew, or should have known that its distributors, retailers, RedHat.com and/or JBoss.org website users, customers, and/or end users’ acts relative to making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the JBoss Application Server, and/or using the JBoss Application Server to practice the inventions claimed in the ‘094 patent, directly infringe, either literally or by equivalents, at least claim 5 of the ‘094 patent. For these reasons, RED HAT is liable for inducing infringement of the ‘094 patent.

17. The JBoss Application Server and the components thereof sold, made, operated, and/or serviced by RED HAT constitute a material part of the inventions claimed in the ‘094 patent and are not staple articles or commodities of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use.

18. Since becoming aware of the ‘094 patent, RED HAT was willfully blind, knew, or should have known that the JBoss Application Server and the components thereof were especially made and/or especially adapted for use in infringing the ‘094 patent.

19. Since becoming aware of the ‘094 patent, RED HAT was willfully blind, knew, or should have known that the JBoss Application Server and the components thereof were not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use.

20. By selling, offering to sell, or importing into the United States the JBoss Application Server and the components thereof, RED HAT has contributed to the infringement of distributors, retailers, customers, and/or end-users who sell, offer for sale, purchase, make, and/or use the JBoss Application Server, and/or use the JBoss Application Server to practice the

4


inventions claimed in the ‘094 patent, and thus directly infringe the ‘094 patent, either literally or by the doctrine of equivalents.

21. RED HAT’s acts of infringement of the ‘094 patent as alleged above have injured BPMS and thus BPMS is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate it for that infringement, which in no event can be less than a reasonable royalty.

JURY DEMAND

22. BPMS demands a trial by jury on all claims and issues, including all of the Defendant’s claims, counterclaims, and issues.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, BPMS prays for entry of judgment:

A. Declaring that RED HAT has infringed at least claim 5 of the ‘094 patent.

B. That RED HAT account for and pay to BPMS all damages caused by the infringement of the ‘094 patent, which by statute can be no less than a reasonable royalty;

C. That BPMS be granted its costs, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the damages caused to it by reason of RED HAT’s infringement of the ‘094 patents;

D. That BPMS be granted its attorneys’ fees in this action;

E. That costs be awarded to BPMS;

F. That BPMS be granted such other and further relief that is just and proper under the circumstances.

March 29, 2012

Respectfully submitted:

By: s/ Stephen W. Abbott
Stephen W. Abbott
Texas Bar No. 00795933
Matthew J.M. Prebeg
Texas Bar No. 00791465
Pro Hac Vice Pending

5


Christopher M. Faucett
Texas Bar No. 00795198
Pro Hac Vice Pending
Matthew S. Compton
Texas Bar No. 24078362
Admission Pending
CLEARMAN | PREBEG LLP
[address telephone fax email]

C. Timothy Reynolds
Texas Bar No. 16796240
Steed Flagg, LLP
[address telephone fax email]

Attorneys for Plaintiff, Business Process
Modeling Solutions LLC d/b/a DE-BPMS
LLC

6


U.S. Patent No. 5,873,094 - [selected portions]

ABSTRACT

A model information control system ("MICS") is used in conjunction with a user-defined information model and one or more conventional information system program modules or "functions"to execute business applications. Following each execution of an action defined by the information model, an Expected Behavior Control System ("EBCS") determines if the resulting behavior is consistent with expected behavior and conforms the behavior to the expected behavior if necessary. The EBCS may also change the behavior of an application processing system or application program by enforcing a new behavior for the application processing system or application program without modifying them. The MICS includes an event-action-state machine that manipulates the user-defined information model and the functions.

CLAIMS

1. A method for automatically detecting and correcting a behavior of an information model, the information model defining a process flow for a software application and being executable in a process flow control engine to perform actions having expected behaviors, comprising the steps of:

monitoring a behavior associated with execution of a given action in an information model;

comparing the monitored behavior associated with execution of the given action to an expected behavior rule defining an expected behavior associated with the action in the information model to determine if the monitored behavior reflects the expected behavior of the information model; and

executing a corrective action when the monitored behavior does not follow the expected behavior rule to correct the monitored behavior associated with the given action of the information model to reflect the expected behavior of the information model.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the expected behavior rule defines a behavior that should result from execution of the given action of the information model.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the expected behavior rule defines a behavior that should not result from execution of the given action of the information model.

4. A method for automatically detecting and correcting a behavior of an information model, the information model defining a process flow for a software application and being executable in a process flow control engine to perform actions having expected behaviors, comprising the steps of:

monitoring a behavior associated with execution of a set of one or more actions of the information model as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine;

comparing the monitored behavior associated with execution of the set of one or more actions of the information model to an expected behavior rule defining an expected behavior of the information model to detect differences between the monitored behavior of the information model and the expected behavior of the information model; and

executing a corrective action within the information model to correct the monitored behavior to reflect the expected behavior when the monitored behavior of the information model does not follow the expected behavior rule.

5. An expected behavior control system for detecting and correcting a behavior of an information model, the information model defining a process flow for a software application and being executable in a process flow control engine to perform actions having expected behaviors, comprising:

an expected behavior function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for detecting if an action executed by the information model provides an expected behavior in accordance with at least one expected behavior rule defining the expected behavior resulting from the executed action of the information model; and

a corrective action function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for executing at least one corrective action on the information model to correct behavior of the information model in response to detection of unexpected behavior of the information model by the expected behavior function.

6. The system of claim 5 wherein the expected behavior function includes a plurality of rules defining expected behaviors associated with actions executed by the information model.

7. The system of claim 6 wherein the corrective action function includes at least one corrective action corresponding to one of the plurality of rules defining an expected behavior.

8. The system of claim 6 wherein the plurality of rules are divided into two groups, comprising:

missing action rules for defining invalid behaviors associated with the execution of an action; and

invalid action rules for defining invalid behaviors associated with the execution of an action.

9. The system of claim 5 wherein the expected behavior function includes at least one rule for enforcing a particular process flow in the information model.

10. An application processing control system for executing at least one software application, comprising:

an information model executable in a process flow control engine defining a single process flow for at least one software application using at least one action; and

an expected behavior control system, responsive to execution of the information model, comprising:

a database defining expected behavior rules associated with the execution of the at least one action;

an expected behavior function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for detecting if an executed action within the information model provides an expected behavior in accordance with at least one expected behavior rule defining the behavior associated with the executed action of the information model; and

a corrective action function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for executing at least one corrective action with the information model to correct behavior in response to detection of unexpected behavior by the expected behavior function.

11. The system of claim 10 wherein the expected behavior control system further comprises:

an expected behavior function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for detecting if an action executed by the information model provides an expected result in accordance with at least one expected behavior rule defining the behavior resulting from an executed action; and

a corrective action function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for executing at least one corrective action with the information model to correct behavior in response to detection of unexpected behavior by the expected behavior function.

12. The system of claim 11 wherein the expected behavior function includes a plurality of rules defining expected behaviors associated with actions executed by the information model.

13. The system of claim 12 wherein the corrective action function includes at least one corrective action corresponding to one of the plurality of rules defining an expected behavior.

14. The system of claim 12 wherein the plurality of rules are divided into two groups, comprising:

missing action rules for defining invalid behaviors associated with the execution of an action; and

invalid action rules for defining invalid behaviors associated with the execution of an action.

15. The system of claim 11 wherein the expected behavior function includes at least one rule for enforcing a particular process flow in the information model.

16. An application processing control system for executing a plurality of software applications, comprising:

an information model defining a single process flow for the plurality of software applications and executable in a process flow control engine; and

an expected behavior control system, responsive to execution of the information model, defining, for each of the plurality of software application a set of actions and behaviors associated with each of the actions, wherein execution of the information model in accordance with a set of actions associated with a specific software application provides a process flow behavior for the software application in accordance with the behavior associated with the set of actions.

17. The system of claim 16 wherein execution of the information model in accordance with a second set of actions associated with a second software application provides a second process flow behavior for the second application in accordance with a behavior associated with the second set of actions.

18. The system of claim 16 wherein the expected behavior control system further comprises:

an expected behavior function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for detecting if an action executed by the information model provides an expected behavior in accordance with at least one expected behavior rule defining the behavior resulting from an executed action; and

a corrective action function operative as the information model is executed by the process flow control engine for executing at least one corrective action in the information model to correct behavior of the information model in response to detection of unexpected behavior by the expected behavior function.

19. The system of claim 18 wherein the expected behavior function includes at least one rule for enforcing a particular process flow in the information model.

DESCRIPTION

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates to computer systems and more particularly to information engineering technology for automated conformance and enforcement of behavior of processing actions of application processing systems.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Information system developers are facing a much different competitive environment than in the recent past. Over the past several years, the emphasis has changed from data processing to management of information systems to decision support systems to strategic information systems. In order to keep up with changes in business, information developers must build systems which are flexible enough to adopt changes in business functions without at the same time incurring excessive maintenance and related costs.

Over the last twenty years or so, software development automation has progressed along three distinct and separate paths. One path pursued increased programming efficiency by automating program coding activities. The result was the development of non-procedural interpretive languages such as fourth generation languages (4GL) and program generators. The second path sought to achieve design effectiveness by bringing structure and rigor to analysis and design. The second path resulted in the development of structured methods of flowcharting programs or dividing programs into functional modules. More recently, automation of such structured methods has been achieved through computer aided software engineering ("CASE") graphic diagraming tools. The third path focused on reusability by taking a database approach to development using objects and data abstraction. This approach initially used a construct known as a data dictionary for accessing information about the data and the relationships among data elements. More recently, such techniques have comprised object-oriented systems and have incorporated so-called information resources dictionaries for storing and accessing objects, programs and data.

Because each of these paths and approaches has merits, there have been attempts made to integrate all of the different tools of the three different paths under the umbrella of information engineering. For example, there is an evolving ANSI standard for repository technology, and IBM has set forth "AD/Cycle," which defines methods to manage all information resources including application specification, programming tools, software programs, software program codes and data.

These approaches, however, do not resolve the problem of application program maintenance. Maintenance and other related support of computer software applications is often expensive, time consuming and unreliable. In order to eliminate maintenance cost, essentially one needs to eliminate application programs themselves. This would have the attendant benefit of reducing the information engineering application development cycle of specification, design, implementation and execution. Neither the three application development paths nor the integrated approaches described above adequately address the maintenance problem or how to solve it.

Another problem with prior art information processing systems relates to the detection of errors in the actions initiated by the application programs run by an application processing system. Prior art techniques focus on the fault arising from an action performing data processing operations and methods for correcting the fault or of continuing system operation despite the fault. However, in many application processing systems, the application program fault is not necessarily resident with the application program. These application programs performing the actions are well tested and implemented. The problem is that the application programs are not providing the expected behavior because an action which is supposed to occur is not occurring or some action occurs which is not supposed to occur.

These type of problems normally remain undetected until the application program breaks down or until poor performance is revealed due to unnecessary processing of actions. In a traditional system, the user must trace the processing flow and observe each action within the processing flow to analyze the performance of the system or to identify errors. Thus, it would be advantageous and very useful to have a system which conforms expected behavior or enforces specific behavior of each action of the application processing system and eliminates incorrect or unnecessary processing to optimize system performance.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention overcomes the foregoing and other problems with a method and apparatus for automated conformance and enforcement of the expected behavior in an application processing system. An expected behavior control system ("EBCS") is integrated with an application processing system including at least one application program having actions defined therein. With respect to the EBCS, the terms "action," "rules," "expression" and "function" are synonymous unless otherwise specified. The EBCS includes an expected behavior function for detecting if an executed action by the control program produces with an expected behavior. Additional, the EBCS may conform or enforce selected behavior to modify the process flow of an application processing system method without modifying the application programs. When an expected behavior is achieved, the application processing system executes the next action defined by the application program. If an unexpected behavior is detected, a correction action function executes at least one corrective action in order to conform or enforce the behavior of the system to achieve an expected behavior.

The foregoing outlines some of the more pertinent aspects of the present invention. These aspects should be construed to be merely illustrative of some of the more prominent features and applications of the invention. Many other beneficial results can be attained by applying the disclosed invention in a different manner or modifying the invention as will be described. Accordingly, other aspects and a fuller understanding of the invention may be achieved by referring to the following detailed description of the preferred embodiment.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

For a more complete understanding of the present invention and the advantages thereof, reference should be made to the following Detailed Description taken in connection with the accompanying drawings in which:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a model information control system;

FIG. 2 is a detailed state diagram of a control system engine of the model information control system of FIG. 1; and

FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an application processing system including an expected behavior control system.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Referring now to FIG. 1, a block diagram is shown of the preferred embodiment of the model information control system (MICS) 10 of the present invention. The MICS 10 includes at least one information model 12 which is created using a text editor and specific semantic rules defined for a target computer system upon which the MICS executes. Several information models are shown in detail below. The target computer system typically comprises a 486-based computer running a UNIX, DOS or OS/2 operating system of the like, although other target systems are useful as well. The MICS also includes a control system engine (CSE) 14 which is preferably a finite state control action machine that cycles through states of operation as will be described in more detail below. The control system engine 14 performs several actions. It activates an object from a set of objects defined in the information model 12. The control system engine 14 also activates an action from a set of actions 16 associated with the object. This is achieved using an associating action flag as will be described.

The control system engine 14 also activates "instants" of the object based on activation constraints of the attributes of the object, and the CSE processes each instant through a function set associated with the action. An "instant" of an object refers to a given condition or state of the values of the object's attributes. An "active" instant of an object exists where the object's attributes have values assigned or instantiated previously by retrieving the values from the database. An "empty" instant is a condition where the values of the object's attributes have yet to assigned or instantiated. Data used by the control system engine is stored in a database (DB) 20 and the engine interacts with the DB 20 through a database interface 22. The user 24 of the MICS interfaces to the rest of the system through a presentation interface 26. Although not shown in detail, it should be appreciated that one or more functions and/or the database may be accessed locally or remotely.

The information model consists of at least one attribute and one control flag or at least one object and a dictionary of attributes. The object generally will include a set of attributes that constitutes a "subset" of the attributes in the dictionary, a number of control flags, and one or more rules or expressions. The control flags, in conjunction with the expressions, facilitate the CSE's use of the object. Preferably, control flags are divided into four distinct types, namely (1) attribute type flags, (2) object type flags that control storage and retrieval of the object's instant(s), (3) action type flags that facilitate activation and processing of instant(s) through one or more functions, and (4) function control flags used with attributes to provide control of attributes specific to the function, e.g., presentation function control flags that can be passed to a user interface function to control the presentation and/or interactions between the user interface function and the various I/O devices of the system (such as the presentation display and report printer).

The attribute type control flags specify how to control the behavior of the attributes such as "storage" classes and "existence" classes. The "storage" classes flags identifies the storage values such as "picture", "video", "voice", "real," "integer," "scientific," "boolean," "ASCII," "data," "time" and the like. So, for example, the attribute PATIENT NAME has two attribute control flags: "TYPE=C, LEN=30." The first flag indicates that the data is the ASCII character format. The LEN=30 indicates the length of the ASCII data storage class.

The attribute "existence" classes of flags control the rules for creating attributes. For example, ATYPE and "select" attribute constraint expressions specify the conditions on how to create one or more attributes. For example the attribute "09:00 A.M." in the Appointment Calendar Information Model has the control flag "ATYPE=T" which specifies the attribute name is of type time, and the attribute "select" constraint defines how to create another attribute which is explained in detail later.

The object type control flags include "primitive," "transient," "atomic," "view," "synonym," "link," "table" and "group." This list is exemplary and other object type flags can be defined and used to categorize and associate one object with one or more other objects. A primitive object type flag indicates that the object's instant(s) are to remain in the MICS in the system for some time. A transient object type flag indicates that the object's instants need only be retained in the system for the duration of processing of particular actions. An atomic object type flag means that the object's instant is derived by abstraction from some other (primitive) instant of the object. An instant identified by a transient object type flag is also retained in the system. A view object type flag indicates that the primary object is a view of some other object. A "synonym" object type flag follows an identification of a primary object and indicates that the attributes of the primary object should be substituted with the attributes of the object identified in a "using of" flag. Thus, if an object A is followed by the flag "using of X," the attributes of object X would be used by object A.

A "group" object type control flag indicates that a set of instants must be processed in a group by a selected action. Each object may also have an associated link object. For example, if object A is an atomic view of a primitive object B, then object B is said to be the associated link object of object A. Or, if the instant of object C can exist if and only if there is a corresponding instant of an another object D, then object D is said to be an associated link object of object C.

As noted above, the action type flags in the object identify the action which facilitates activation and processing of instant(s) by the CSE. An action consists of four control flags, namely "action identifier," "instant type," "action class," "instant propagation type," and optionally one or more "function." An action identifier flag is the flag by which the particular action is known external to the system. The instant type flag indicates the type of instant (active or empty). The action class flag identifies which class of actions the particular action belongs. An instant propagation type flag indicates how to propagate the change of instant for a primitive or atomic object of the instant. The functions if defined may be required to be executed to process the instant.

The functions are included in the MICS system using a compiler and link/editor or other conventional means. Such functions may be "off-the-shelf" modules or actually written into the MICS if desired. However, once the function set is defined, it is not necessary to maintain the function set code in any traditional sense.

As noted above, when the object is defined in the information model, it will typically include presentation control function flags that control presentation of the object's attributes by external interfaces. In particular, each attribute therein may include one or more of the presentation control flags which can be passed to the user interface function to control the presentation and/or interactions between the user interface function and the various I/O devices of the system (such as the presentation display and report printer). Representative sample of presentation control flags are FPROT, MFILL, RJUST, FHIDE, DPROT, RSKIP, CENTER, GROUP, COMMON, UNIQUE, WSKIP and PHIDE. An FPROT presentation control flag provides a field protection action that prevents the user from instantiating the particular attribute of the object. An MFILL flag indicates that the attribute is one that the user must instantiate. The RJUST, LJUST, or CENTER flags inform the presentation interface to right justify, left justify, or center value of the attribute to the presentation display. An FHIDE flag prevents the value of the from being displayed. A DPROT flag protects the value of the attribute overwritten to DPROT from being erased. A COMMON flag indicates that the attribute is shared by multiple users and may require specific action for active instants before execution of any propagation expression. A UNIQUE flag indicates the instances of the object are organized by the value of the attribute and indicates to create the index attribute of the object. This is explained later in the Appointment Calendar Information Model example. An RSKIP flag tells the presentation interface to skip the attribute when a report is printed, and an WSKIP flag tells the interface to skip the attribute when a window is created on the display. PHIDE flag hides the name of the attribute. GROUP flag indicates that the interface should organize values of attributes for a display so it is easy to read. For example, a patient list can be grouped by city, state, and zip code, and a financial report could be grouped by day, week and month. The object may include other presentation control flags for similar control purposes.

According to a feature of the invention, attributes and objects in the information model use consistent rules or "expressions" that, in conjunction with the various control flags, facilitate the application process flow to execute information model. The attributes of an object contain (i) information on how to assign values to these attributes, (ii) value constraints limiting the kind of values that can be assigned to these attributes, (iii) dependency information specifying how assigning a particular value to one attribute affects the value of another attribute, and (iv) select constraints creating one or more attributes with specific constraints. More specifically, at the attribute level these rules include (i) "initial values" or "default values" expressions that assign values to these attributes, (ii) "values," "condition" or "assignment" expressions limiting the kind of values that can be assigned to these attributes, and (iii) "activation" expressions specifying how to change the value of attributes when instances are activated, (iv) "propagation" expressions specifying how assigning a particular value to one attribute affects the value of another attribute, (v) "select" expressions specifying constraints limiting the kind of instants that can be activated. Similar rules or expressions are implemented at the object level. When used in an object, these expressions modify the behavior of the instant of the object to effect the activation, instantiation and processing of information. For example, a constraint expression at the object level specifies the activation constraint limiting what kind of instants of the object can be activated. Finally, the object also includes index attributes by which instances of an object can be stored and retrieved via the database using the value of one or more attributes of the object.

Thus according to the invention, an object generally includes one or more control flags that facilitate the CSE's use of the object, a subset of attributes selected from a dictionary of attributes, and one or more rules or expressions that modify the behavior of an object's instants to affect the activation, instantiation and processing of information. An object's attributes may also include expressions that control how to assign values to these attributes, that limit the kind of values that can be assigned to these attributes, that specify how to change the value of attributes when instances are activated, that specify how assigning a particular value to one attribute affects the value of another attribute, and that specify constraints limiting the kind of instants that can be activated.

An advantageous feature of the present invention is that the MICS emulates application processing with autonomous control by directly converting one or more information models into an independent set of activation, instantiation and processing of functions using control flags defined in the model, thereby automating the application process flow of an application program. In the prior art, it has heretofore been necessary to create a detailed design of such process flow (and to automatically or manually generate source code to implement the flow). The present invention wholly obviates such detailed design and code generation.

According to the preferred embodiment of the invention, the MICS includes one or more information models and the control system engine (CSE). The control system engine reads the information model directly and in response thereto (i) activates objects from the set of objects defined in the information model, (ii) activates actions from a set of actions associated with action control flags of an object, (iii) activates one or more "instants" of an object and (iv) processes the one or more instants of the object through one or more interfaces or functions associated with the actions along with any expressions associated with the object and/or its attributes. In this manner, the MICS activates and processes the independent set of activation, instantiation and service actions over the information models.

A specific implementation of the MICS incorporating the features of the present invention can now be described. By way of additional background, it is helpful to define the concept of an "action" which refers to the automatic categorization and association of functions using control flags to control activation, instantiation and processing of information using one or more functions. This obviates the specific creation of process flow instructions for each application. Applications thus can be said to be isolated from the process flow specification process because the information model only needs to specify an action and not how the action is implemented. An "action" is preferably categorized by its class of service or type of function that it uses. For convenience, action class types are divided as follows:

1) ANALYSIS type (actions that process an active instants through one or more functions that analyze information);

2) DATABASE type (actions that process an active instant through one or more functions that access and manipulate information);

3) REPORT type (actions that process an active instant through one or more functions that create reports from information);

4) ADD type (actions that process an empty instant through one or more functions to create an active instant);

5) UPDATE type (actions that process an active instant through one or more functions that access, manipulate and return an active instant to the database);

6) DELETE type (actions that process an active instant through one or more functions that remove the trace of an instant from the database); and

7) CREATE type (actions that process an active instant through one or more functions to create atomic information from primitive information).

The above list of action types is merely exemplary and the MICS may include other action types or variations of the above. Each action has associated therewith the set of action control flags previously described. It should be noted that different sets of action control flags can be used instead of the flags identified above.

In an exemplary embodiment of the invention, for instance, assume that the action type is UPDATE. The associated action control flags are then: "UPDATE, ACTIVE INSTANT, DATABASE, UPDATE INSTANT, USR.sub.-- INSTANTIATION." The first flag UPDATE is the identifier flag that identifies the action UPDATE. The second flag ACTIVE INSTANT indicates that the action requires an active instant. The third flag DATABASE identifies that the UPDATE action belongs to the DATABASE action class type. The fourth flag, UPDATE INSTANT, is the instant propagation type that will cause the CSE to update the final state of the active instant using the database interface. Finally, the function USR.sub.-- INSTANTIATION indicates that the CSE will require the execution of a user instantiation function. The user instantiation function instantiates an instant through the user interface.

In another example, assume the action is ADD. The ADD action has action control flags "ADD, EMPTY INSTANT, DATABASE, UPDATE INSTANT, USR-INSTANTIATION," The first flag identifies the action ADD. The second flag indicates that the action operates on an empty instant. The third flag identifies that the ADD action belongs to the DATABASE action class type. The fourth flag, UPDATE INSTANT, is the instant propagation type flag and will cause the CSE to add a newly created instant to the database using the database interface. Finally, the function USR-INSTANTIATION indicates that CSE will require execution of a user instantiation function.

With the above background, the following is a portion of a representative object from an information model (shown below) for a medical office accounting, billing and patient management system:

_________MODEL MEDICAL _____________
#OBJECT PATIENT CHART,PRIMITIVE,DATABASE ACNT
NO,TYPE=1,LEN=8,GROUP=100,FPROT DEFAULT VALUE
[ACNT NO] = SEQNUMBER. VISIT FIRST,TYPE=d,GROUP
=100,FPROT,SETDATE LAST,TYPE=D,GROUP=100,FPROT,
SETDATE PATIENT NAME,TYPE=A,LEN=30,GROUP=102,MFILL
ADDRESS,TYPE=A,LEN=30,GROUP=103,MFILL
CITY,TYPE=A,LEN=15,GROUP=104,MFILL STATE,TYPE=A,
LEN=2,GROUP=104,MFILL ZIP CODE,TYPE=L,PTYPE=Z,
LEN=5,GROUP=104,MFILL BIRTHDATE,TYPE=D,GROUP=
105,MFILL SEX,TYPE=A,LEN=1,GROUP=105,MFILL Constraint,
values M - MALE, F - FEMALE. MARITAL
STATUS,TYPE=A,LEN=1,GROUP=105,MFILL Constraint,
values S - SINGLE, M - MARRIED, W - WIDOWED, D -
DIVORCED. PHONE NO(HOME) ,TYPE=S,PTYPE=P,LEN=10,
GROUP=106,RJUST (OFFICE) ,TYPE=S,PTYPE=P,LEN=10,
GROUP=106,RJUST SOCIAL SEC.#,TYPE=L,PTYPE=S,LEN=9,
GROUP=107 DRIVER LIC.#,TYPE=C,LEN=15,GROUP=107 . . .
______________________________________

The first field in the first line includes the object's name (in this case PATIENT CHART). The second field in the line includes the object type flag identifying the type of object (in this case primitive). Following the object type flag, the next field identifies the action type flags that identify the one or more actions that the CSE can select for activation, instantiation and processing of instant(s) of an object. In this example, an object having the DATABASE action class flag merely indicates to the CSE to substitute all actions associated with the DATABASE action class as available actions (thus making it unnecessary to individually list each action of the set).

Following the object type and action type control flags on the first line of the object, the object includes a set of attributes. As can be seen, the patient chart object is used for accounting and information purposes and thus includes such attributes as name, address, date of last visit and account number, as well as others. The object further includes a number of presentation control flags that are associated with particular attributes. As noted above, the GROUP flags in the attributes are used to group different attributes of the object on the same line of the interface display. Thus ACNT NO, VISIT FIRST, and LAST attributes will be presented on the same line. An attribute will also include a DATA statement if the same attribute is used more than once in the object.

Referring now to FIG. 2, a detailed state diagram is shown of the preferred operation of the control system engine (CSE) of the MICS. The various states of the CSE and associated control actions are identified below:

(1) Initialize MICS

(2) Select Model

(3) Select Object

(4) Select Action

(5) Activate Instant

(6) Process Instant

(7) Terminate Model

(8) Terminate CSE

Prior to the CSE execution, one or more information models are created by a developer using semantic rules for the target system. Each information model has one of three states: idle, active and suspended. When an information model is in its idle state, its "next state" is active. An information model in the active state can be suspended at any time during the processing of the information model. Once suspended, the information model can be returned to its active state (at the same point therein where processing was suspended) or the suspended information model can be placed back into its idle state. Each information model has associated therewith a attribute identifying its state and its next state. Execution of the control system engine begins with State 1. In state 1, the CSE is initialized. This step obtains the necessary resources (e.g., memory, buffer pools, interprocess communication environment, I/O interface environment) from the operating system and then reads the action table definitions and function table definitions and loads them into memory. The CSE also creates structure in the memory to hold the information models, and loads information models into the memory. State 1 also sets up the user environment's presentation interface 26.

In State 1, all information models are set to idle and the information model attribute is set to "3" (which is the next state after selection of an idle model). The CSE then moves to State 2. If there is a failure during State 1, the CSE goes to State 8 and terminates, providing an error message or the like.

In State 2, the user is prompted to select an information model. Although not meant to be limiting, preferably the presentation interface is a Windows-based graphical user interface (GUI) and a conventional point and click device is used to make appropriate selections. If the user selects a model, the CSE activates the selected model and sets an "active model" to the selected model. The activation of a model means assigning necessary storage area, initializing databases, building a dictionary from the set of attributes from all objects and creating sets of attributes with an associated attribute constraint expression or merely building a group of attributes with associated attribute constraint expression. This will be more fully shown later with respect to a calendar example. If the user decides to cancel the session, the CSE activates the most recently suspended model to "active model." The CSE then proceeds to the next state of the active model. If the user decides to exit, the CSE proceeds to State 8 and the CSE is terminated.

In State 3, the CSE first determines whether there are one or more objects defined for the active model. If there is no object, set object equal to model name and copy all control flags and control expressions defined at model to object, and set all attributes of model as attributes of object. If there is only one object defined for the active model, the CSE sets "active object" attribute to this object and proceeds to State 4. On the active model, the CSE controls the presentation interface to display the list of available objects (which are defined in the information model) and prompts the user to select one. If the user selects one of the objects, the CSE sets an "active object" attribute to the selected object and proceeds to State 4. If the user decides to cancel, the CSE returns to State 2, from which the CSE then proceeds to State 7 in which the active model is terminated.

In State 4, the CSE first determines whether there is an action class flag associated with the active object. If there is one, the CSE substitutes all action flags associated with the action's class as valid action flags. If there is only action flag, the CSE sets an action associated with the action flag to "active action" and proceeds to state 5. On the other hand, if there is more than one action flag, the CSE controls the presentation interface to display the list of action names associated with action flags of the active objects and prompts the user to select one. If the user selects one of the actions, the CSE sets an "active action" attribute to the action associated with the action name of the selected action of the active object and proceeds to State 5. If the user decides to cancel, the CSE goes back to State 3. If the user decides to exit, the CSE proceeds to State 7. If the user decides, however, to access another information model during State 4, the CSE sets the active model's next state equal to 4, suspends the active model and proceeds back to State 2.

In State 5, processing begins by first setting all values of the attributes of active objects to zero except those attributes having the DPROT flag set. Then a test is performed to determine whether the active object has an associated link object. If so, the CSE activates the instant of the link object. If activation for a link object fails, the CSE returns to state 4. If the activation for the link object has been successful, or if the active object does not have an associated link object, then the routine continues by determining whether the active object requires an active instant. If so, the CSE then activates the instant using a select condition if one exists in the active object. (The select activation constraint of the object maps directly to a select call associated with the database 20). If activation fails, and there is no learn flag, the CSE goes to state 4. If activation is successful or no activation is required, the CSE goes to State 6. If activation fails and there is a learn flag, the CSE also goes to state 6 because the learn flag instructs the CSE to accept an empty instant even though an active instant might otherwise be required. For example, in an appointment calendar information model, the database will not necessarily contain the instances corresponding to all calendar dates. When the user requests to see the data for a specific page of the calendar and no data for such page exists in the database, the learn flag allows the CSE to accept the empty page as an active page with no data in it so that when the user enters the data on this page it will be entered into the database. Also, the CSE executes any activation expression if one exists for the active instant. If the user decides, however, to access another information model during State 5, the CSE sets the active model's next state equal to 5, suspends the active model and proceeds back to state 2. For each of the actions described above, such as activations of instants, assigning of values and execution of expressions a check is performed by the Expected Behavior Control System (EBCS) to determine if the processing actions initiated by the actions provide an expected behavior. For conformance of actions to a particular behavior, the checks are only performed after an action is performed. For enforcing particular process flow behavior, the checks by the EBCS may be performed both before and after the processing of actions. The EBCS will be more fully discussed in a moment.

In State 6, the routine first determines if there is any function flag associated with the active action. If one or more function flags exist, then for each function flag, the CSE executes the associated function and any process propagation expression associated with the active object over all instants which satisfy activation constraints in the object. The function may be an instantiation function, e.g., a user instantiation function that interacts with the user using the presentation interface and presentation control flags. The CSE will also process any attribute flags by mapping the attribute flags into appropriate functions. For example, the presentation flags are used to create windows and control the interaction with the data in the window. Only data that satisfies attribute constraints is accepted and upon acceptance, the CSE also executes any propagation expression associated with any attribute. If the user decides, however, to access another information model during State 6, the CSE sets the active model's next state equal to 6, suspends the active model and proceeds back to State 2.

If no function is associated with the active action exist or if the functions associated with the active action have been successfully executed, the CSE executes any propagation expression associated with object and the routine continues by determining if any object type flag is primitive or atomic. If not, the CSE goes to state 4 to select the next action. If yes, then the CSE determines whether the current action has an update instant or delete instant (instant propagation type action control) flag. If an update instant flag exists, active instants are updated or an empty instant is added to the database. If an delete instant flag exists, the CSE deletes an active instant and ignores empty instants. If an object has link objects, its associated link propagation expressions are executed and its instants are updated. If user selects NEXT or PREVIOUS event, the CSE obtains the NEXT or PREVIOUS instant. If user selects a PROCESS event, the CSE returns to state 4. If an error occurs during any of these activities, the CSE returns to state 4 with an event flag indicating a failure. As in State 5, for each action a test is performed for the EBCS to check for expected behavior to conform or enforce the processing actions to provide an expected behavior.

In State 7, the active model is terminated and the CSE activates the most recently suspended model is one exists and goes to the next state of the activated model; otherwise the CSE returns to State 2.

In State 8, the CSE is terminated. Once the CSE is initialized it executes through its various states until State 8 is reached. As the CSE executes, the functionality defined in the information model is effected in the same way as a prior art source code program executes.

An exemplary implementation of several information models for use in the MICS will now be illustrated which do not utilize an EBCS. In this example,the MICS includes three information models: an appointment book (MODEL APPOINTMENT CALENDAR), a notepad (MODEL NOTEPAD) and a complex medical system (MODEL MEDICAL). The Appointment Calendar model includes a short list of attributes (such as the date, day of week, time and daily time increments) and control expressions. The initial values expression that initiate the date, the day of week and the time to current system date, day of week and time, a default values expression that sets the value of the day of week attribute to a corresponding value of the date attribute, and a constraint assignment expression that sets the date to prevdate (date-1) or nextdate (date+1) based on EVENT prev and next, respectively. Likewise, the notepad model includes a short list of attributes. The medical system includes a list of numerous objects. The system control tables consisting of action and function control flags is also provided to understand the examples.

___________ SYSTEM CONTROL TABLES
____________#ACTION ADD
,EMPTY INSTANT,DATABASE,UPDATE INSTANT,USR
INSTANTIATIONUPDATE,ACTIVE INSTANT,DATABASE,UPDATE
INSTANT,USR INSTANTIATION DELETE,ACTIVE INSTANT,DATABASE,
DELETE INSTANT, USR.sub.-- INSTANTIATION REPORT,ACTIVE
INSTANT,REPORT,0,0, CREATE.sub.-- REPORT CREATE ATOMIC
DATA,ACTIVE INSTANT, ANALYSIS,UPDATE INSTANT,CREATE.sub.--
ATOMIC.sub.-- DATA GRAPH,ACTIVE INSTANT,ANALYSIS,0,0,GRAPH
LEARN ASSOCIATION,ACTIVE INSTANT,ANALYSIS,0,0, LEARN.sub.--
ATOMIC.sub.-- DATA USE ASSOCIATION,ACTIVE INSTANT, ANALYSIS,
0,0,USE.sub.-- ATOMIC.sub.-- DATA #MODEL APPOINTMENT
CALENDAR,PRIMITIVE,UPDATE,LEARN Description You can use Calendar
program to keep track of your appointments SELECT, INSTANT (NEXT INSTANT)
[DATE] += 1; (PREV INSTANT) [DATE] -= 1. DATE,TYPE=D,UNIQUE DATE,
TYPE=D,PTYPE=D,TEMP 09:00 A.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66,ATYPE=t Description
Type any information you want to include for this time slot. SELECT,ATTRIBUTE
(ATTRIBUTE 0)) [PATIENT PAYMENTS] = [PATIENT PAYMENTS] + [POST
AMNT]; (([CTYPE] EQUAL TO 8) AND ([POST AMNT] > 0)) [INSURANCE
PAYMENTS] = [INSURANCE PAYMENTS]+ [POST AMNT]; [LAST] = DATE;
([STMNT] > [ACTIVE STMNT]) [ACTIVE STMNT] = [STMNT]. link propagation
([POST AMOUNTS] != 0) [BALANCE] = [BALANCE] + [POSTAMOUNTS].
DOCNAME,FHIDE,HEADER,DPROT LINE1,FHIDE,HEADER,DPROT
LINE2,FHIDE,HEADER,DPROT LINE3,FHIDE,HEADER,DPROT
LINE4,FHIDE,HEADER,DPROT ACNT
STRING,PHIDE,COL=50,GROUP=98,FPROT,DPROT PATIENT
NAME,GROUP=100,FPROT,PHIDE,COL=5,DPROT ACNT
NO,GROUP=100,FPROT,COL=55,DPROT
ADDRESS,GROUP=101,FPROT,PHIDE,COL=5,DPROT
STMNT,GROUP=101,FPROT,COL=57,DPROT
CITY,GROUP=102,FPROT,PHIDE,COL=5,DPROT
STATE,GROUP=102,FPROT,PHIDE,FCAT,DPROT ZIP
CODE,GROUP=102,FPROT,PHIDE,FCAT,DPROT

BALANCE,GROUP=102,COL=55,DPROT STMNT,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP
TRANS DATE,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10 TO
DATE,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP CODE,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP vAMOUNT,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP UNIT,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP
PS,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP TS,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP
DIAG,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,RSKIP
DESCRIPTION,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,FPROT AMOUNTS,GROUP=105,ENTRY=10,WSKIP,RJUST
CHARGES,GROUP=106,WSKIP CREDITS,GROUP=106,WSKIP
BALANCE,GROUP=106,WSKIP,DPROT TOTAL OF AMOUNT,RSKIP,TEMP
Constraint, assignment [TOTAL OF AMOUNT] = COLSUM([AMOUNT]).
POST
AMOUNTS,FHIDE OLD AMOUNT,FHIDE CDFLG,FHIDE,TEMP
Constraint,values 1 - debit,-1 - credit. #OBJECT REMOVE VISIT
CHARGE,SYNONYM OF BILLING DATABASE,UPDATE activation
propagation =BILLING DATABASE. #OBJECT PRINT INSURANCE
FORM,VIEW of BILLING DATA,NOLINE,REPORT,GROUP=6 initial values
[STMNT NUMBER] = [ACTIVE STMNT]; GETVALUE([STMNT NUMBER]).
activation propagation [AMOUNTS] = [AMOUNT] * [UNIT]; ([CDFLG] EQUAL TO 1)
[CHARGES) = [CHARGES] + [AMOUNTS]; ([CDFLG] EQUAL TO -1)
[CREDITS] = [CREDITS] + [AMOUNTS]. Constraint, condition (([CDFLG] EQUAL TO
1) AND ([AMOUNT] > 0) AND ([STMNT] EQUAL TO [STMNT NUMBER])). post
propagation [POST AMOUNTS] = 0; [CREDITS] = 0; [CHARGES] = 0.
CARRIER NAME,PHIDE,ROW=1,COL=43
(ADDRESS),PHIDE,ROW=2,COL=43 (CITY),PHIDE,ROW=3,COL=43
(STATE),PHIDE,ROW=3,FCAT (ZIP CODE),PHIDE,ROW=3,FCAT INSURANCE
TYPE,PHIDE,ROW=7,COL=2 INS ID,PHIDE,ROW=7,COL=50
PATIENT NAME,PHIDE,ROW=9,COL=1 BIRTHDATE,PHIDE,ROW=9,COL=30
SEX,PHIDE,ROW=9,COL=41,BOX=5
RESP. PARTY'S NAME,PHIDE,ROW=9,C0L=50
ADDRESS,PHIDE,ROW=11,COL=1
RELATIONSHIP,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=11,COL=32,BOX=5
ADDRESS,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=11,COL=50 CITY,PHIDE,ROW=13,COL=1
STATE,PHIDE,ROW=13,COL=26 MARITAL
STATUS,PHIDE,ROW=13,COL=34,BOX=5
CITY,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=13,COL=50 STATE,DATA=1,PHIDE1
ROW=13,COL=74 ZIP CODE,PHIDE,ROW=15,COL=1 PHONE NO
(HOME),PHIDE,RJUST,COL=13 EMPLOYMENT
STATUS,PHIDE,COL=34,ROW=15 ZIP
CODE,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=15,COL=50 PHONE NO
(HOME),PHIDE,RJUST,ROW=15,COL=63 INSURED'S vNAME,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=17,COL=1 GROUP ID,PHIDE,ROW=17,COL=50
GROUP ID,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=19,COL=1 CONDITION RELATED TO
JOB?,PHIDE,BOX=6,ROW=19,COL=34
BIRTHDATE,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=19,COL=53
SEX,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=19,COL=69,BOX=5
BIRTHDATE,DATA=2,PHIDE,ROW=21,COL=1
SEX,DATA=2,PHIDE,ROW=21,COL=17,BOX=6 AUTO
ACCIDENT?,PHIDE,ROW=21,COL=34,BOX=6 EMPLOYER'S
NAME,DATA=2,PHIDE,ROW=21,COL=50 EMPLOYER'S
NAME,DATA=3,PHIDE,ROW=23,COL=1 OTHER
ACCIDENT?,PHIDE,ROW=23,COL=34,BOX=6 PLAN
NAME,PHIDE,ROW=23,COL=50 PLAN
NAME,DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=25,COL=1 OTHER
INSURANCE?,PHIDE,ROW=25,COL=51,BOX=5 DATE OF SYMPTOM
(CURRENT),PHIDE,ROW=31,COL=2 (PRIOR),PHIDE,ROW=31,COL=38 UNBL TO
WORK (FROM),PHIDE,ROW=31,COL=54
(TO),DATA=1,PHIDE,ROW=31,COL=68 REFERRING
PHYSICIAN,PHIDE,ROW=33,COL=1 PHYSICIAN ID,PHIDE,ROW=33,COL=29
HOSPITAL DATE (FROM),PHIDE,ROW=33,COL=54
(TO),PHIDE,ROW=33,COL=68 OUTSIDE LAB?,PHIDE,ROW=35,COL=52 LAB
AMNT,PHIDE,ROW=35,COL=62 MEDICAID RESUB
CODE,PHIDE,ROW=37,COL=50 ORIGINAL REF
NO,PHIDE,ROW=37,COL=62 AUTHORIZATION
NO,PHIDE,ROW=39,COL=51,LINE=1 TRANS
DATE,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=1,LINE=1 TO
DATE,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=1O vPS,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=19 TS,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=22
CPT4 CODE,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=25
DIAG,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=42
AMOUNT,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,R0W=43,COL=48,RJUST
UNIT,PHIDE,ENTRY=6,ROW=43,COL=58
FEDTAXID,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=55,COL=2 IDTYPE,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=55,COL=16,BOX=3 Constraint,values
S - SSN,E - EIN. ACNT NO,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=55,COL=23
ASSIGNMENT,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=55,COL=37
CHARGES,PHIDE,ROW=55,COL=50,RJUST PATIENT
PAYMENTS,PHIDE,FHIDE CHARGES,PHIDE,ROW=55,COL=69,RJUST
DOCNAME,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=57,COL=51
LINE1,PHIDE,DPROT,FHIDE
LINE2,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=58,COL=51
LINE3,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=59,COL=51 PIN,PHIDE,DPROT,ROW=60,COL=51
#OBJECT DAILY JRNL,JOURNAL OF BILLING DATA,BROWSE, CREATE link
initial values GETVALUE([FROM.sub.-- DATE],[TO.sub.-- DATE]). link
Constraint,condition (([TRANS DATE] GE [FROM.sub.-- DATE]) AND ([TRANS
DATE] LE[TO.sub.-- DATE.sub.--)). link activation propagation [F] = 1; [JRNL DATE]
= [TRANS DATE]; [PTYPE] = [ITYPE]; [POST AMNT] = [AMOUNT] * [UNIT] *
[CDFLG]. link propagation [F] = 1; (ACTIVE INSTANT) [F] = 2; [JRNL DATE] =
DATE; [PTYPE] = [ITYPE]. JRNL DATE,TYPE=D ACNT NO PATIENT NAME TRANS
DATE STMNT CODE CDFLG CTYPETYPE=N,LEN=1 Constraint,values 1 -
OBSTETRICS, 2 - SONOGRAM, 3 - LASER, 4 - MEDICAL 5 - GYNECOLOGY/
SURGERY, 6 - OFFICE, 7 - OTHER SERVICE, 8 - INSURANCE PAYMENT, 9 -
OTHER PAYMENT, 10 - REFUND, 11 - CHARGE/CREDIT ADJST, 12 - CHARGE/
DEBIT ADJST, 13 - PMNT/CREDIT ADJST, 14 - PMNT/DEBIT ADJST. PTYPE
F,TYPE=N,LEN=1 POST AMNT,TYPE=R,LEN=10,DEC=2 #OBJECT DAILY
RECONCILIATION,VIEW OF DAILYJRNL,BROWSE,REPORT,PAGE activation
propagation ([CTYPE] 1). ACNT NO,GROUP=133,FPROT VISIT
FIRST,GROUP=133,FPROT LAST,GROUP=133,FPROT PATIENT vNAME,GROUP=134,FPROT PHONE NO
(HOME),GROUP=134,DATA=2,FPROT,RJUST,PHIDE
(OFFICE),GROUP=134,DATA=2,FPROT,PHIDE RESP. PARTY'S
NAME,GROUP=136,FPROT RELATIONSHIP,GROUP=136,DATA=1,FPROT
CARRIER CODE,GROUP=137 CARRIER NAME,GROUP=137,FPROT
PHONE NO,GROUP=138,RJUST FAX NO,GROUP=138,RJUST (800)
NO,GROUP=138,RJUST PLAN NAME,GROUP=139 INS ID,GROUP=139
GROUP ID,GROUP=139 DEDUCTIBLE,GROUP=141 INSURANCE
COVERAGE(%),GROUP=141 PATIENT PORTION,GROUP=141 BILLING
DATE,GROUP=142 INS BILLING DATE,GROUP=142 PATIENT
PAYMENTS,GROUP=143 INSURANCE PAYMENTS,GROUP=143
BALANCE,GROUP=143,FPROT AUTHORIZATION NO,GROUP=145
OUTSIDE LAB?,GROUP=145 LAB AMNT,GROUP=145 MEDICAID RESUB
CODE,GROUP=146 ORIGINAL REF NO,GROUP=146 DATE OF SYMPTOM
(CURRENT),GROUP=147 (PRIOR),GROUP=147 REFERRING
PHYSICIAN,GROUP=148 PHYSICIAN ID,GROUP=148
FACILITY,GROUP=149 HOSPITAL DATE (FROM),GROUP=150
(TO),GROUP=150 UNBL TO WORK (FROM),GROUP=151
(TO),GROUP=151,DATA=1 CONDITION RELATED TO JOB?,GROUP=152 AUTO
ACCIDENT?,GROUP=152 OTHER ACCIDENT?,GROUP=152 ACTIVE
STMNT,GROUP=153,FPROT #OBJECT PRINT BILL,SYNONYM OF BILLING
DATABASE, REPORT initial values =PRINT INSURANCE FORM.
Constraint,condition ([STMNT] EQUAL TO [STMNT NUMBER]). activation
propagation =PRINT INSURANCE FORM. #OBJECT LIST OB DUE PATIENT,VIEW
OF PATIENTCHART,BROWSE,GROUP=16,REPORT,PAGE initial values
GETVALUE([MONTH]). Constraint,condition ([MONTH] EQUAL TO MMYYYY
([OB DUE])). PATIENT NAME OB DUE #OBJECT LIST RECALL
PATIENT,VIEW OF PATIENTCHART,BROWSE,GROUP=16,REPORT,PAGE
initial values GETVALUE([MONTH]). Constraint,condition ([MONTH] EQUAL TO
MMYYYYY ([RECALL[)). PATIENT NAME RECALL #OBJECT ACCOUNT
BALANCE DUE,VIEW of PATIENT CHART,

BROWSE, REPORT, PAGE Constraint,condition ([BALANCE] > 1). ACNT NO
PATIENT NAME BALANCE LAST #OBJECT PRACTICE ANALYSIS,ATOMIC
OF DAILY JRNL, ANALYSIS link activation propagation [MONTH] = MMYYYY
([JRNL DATE]); ([CTYPE] EQUAL TO 0) [CTYPE] = 1. link propagation SUMBY
( [CTYPE] ,[POST AMNT]); ([CTYPE] 0) AND ([CTYPE]
____________________

As can be seen, the medical system is much more complicated as compared to the simple notepad and calendar applications. Despite the length of the information model itself, however, it should be appreciated that the model is all that is required for purposes of executing the business application. In other words, once the medical system information model is written, it is not required for the user to write source code or other high level code to implement the model. It is further not required that the user maintain source code or the like to implement enhancements or to correct errors. In this regard, all the user need do is to modify the information model (e.g., by adding an attribute, modifying or adding an object, changing an expression in an object, etc.). In operation, the information model is directly processed by the CSE. The MICS may include a preprocessor to process the expressions if desired and the functions can be embedded in the MICS or can be distinct therefrom and thus executed using IPC facilities. The base MICS need not be changed or altered.

With reference to the medical system information model and the function set previously described, the trace of the CSE for the exemplary system can also be seen for a system which does not utilize the expected behavior control system which will be more fully discussed in a moment:

State 1: MICS initializes presentation interface and creates linked list of three models namely appointment calendar, notepad and medical system.

State 2: CSE displays three models using presentation interface. Assume the user conditions the medical system. The CSE activates the medical system model and sets "active model" attribute to the medical system.

State 3: CSE displays the following objects to user using the presentation interface:

PATIENT CHART

BILLING DATABASE

PRINT BILL

PRINT INSURANCE FORM

DAILY RECONCILIATION

BILLING?INS MNGMNT

LIST OB DUE PATIENT

LIST RECALL PATIENT

ACCOUNT BALANCE DUE

PRACTICE ANALYSIS

INS CHARGE ANALYSIS

PROCEDURE CODE

INSURANCE COMPANY

DIAGNOSIS CODE

POST EXPENSES

EXPENSE REPORT

Assuming the user conditions the PATIENT CHART object, the CSE proceeds to State 4.

State 4: CSE displays the following action associated with PATIENT CHART object using the presentation interface (note that these actions are displayed because they are the only action flags in the object and the actions associated with such action flags):

ADD

UPDATE

DELETE

VIEW

Assume now that the user conditions UPDATE. The CSE then proceeds to state 5.

State 5: CSE sets all values of PATIENT CHART object to null. CSE looks for initial values expression of the PATIENT CHART. There are no such expressions; if one existed it would have been executed. The primary object has no associated link object so no instant is activated for a link object. The CSE then selects data object of the PATIENT CHART. Since PATIENT CHART type is primitive, the DATA OBJECT of PATIENT CHART is PATIENT CHART itself. Because the action instant type flag of an active action is ACTIVE INSTANT and PATIENT CHART has no constraint expression, the CSE instantiates instant of the DATA OBJECT as follows:

The CSE displays the following two keys using the presentation interface (because the PATIENT CHART instances are accessed by indexes or keys as indicated in the index at the end of the object):

ACCOUNT NO

PATIENT NAME

Assuming the user enters the key value for PATIENT NAME, the CSE interacts until a valid key value is entered. The CSE also activates instant associated with PATIENT NAME by instantiating PATIENT CHART attributes using the database interface. Assuming activation is successful, the CSE looks for an activation expression associated with PATIENT CHART object. There is none here; if one existed it would have been executed.

State 6: CSE first determines if there is any function flag associated with the UPDATE action. In this case there is only one function USR.sub.-- INSTANTIATION, so CSE executed USR.sub.-- INSTANTIATION function. This function displays attributes to user using presentation control flags and the presentation interface. The user then modifies the attributes and returns an "event." If event is not "process" (selection of PROCESS or NEXT or PREV EVENT), the CSE proceeds to an appropriate state described in the state 6 logic of the CSE. Assuming the selected event is "process", the CSE executes any propagation expression associated with the active object. In this case there is none. CSE then determines if DATA OBJECT associated with PRIMARY OBJECT is primitive or atomic. In this case DATA OBJECT of PRIMARY OBJECT PATIENT CHART is PATIENT CHART itself. Since PATIENT CHART is primitive, CSE then determines if active action has any instant propagation type flag. In this instant propagation type flag is UPDATE INSTANT. Since Patient CHART instant is ACTIVE INSTANT the CSE updates the instant of PATIENT CHART using the database interface. If "process" is a result of PREV/NEXT event then the CSE will get prev/next instant of the patient chart from the database, activate the instant and repeat state 6, else the CSE returns to state 4. In the present case, assume "process" was the result of even PROCESS, then CSE returns to state 4. This completes the processing.

Referring now to the second calendar program information model, the model contains no dictionary or object. The model also does not implement the expected behavior control system. The trace of the CSE for the exemplary system in which the system learns can also be seen.

State 1: MICS initializes the presentation interface and creates a linked list of three models, namely the appointment calendar, notepad and medical system.

State 2: The CSE activates the appointment calendar as follows. CSE displays the three models using presentation interface. Assume the user conditions the appointment calendar.

Since the appointment calendar has no object, CSE creates appointment calendar object and sets control flags and control expressions defined at model equal to object, that is UPDATE ADD, SELECT EXPRESSION. The CSE also sets all attributes defined under the model as attributes of appointment calendar object, Now if object has attribute type and selects expression type attribute, it expands attributes using attribute selection expression. In this, 9:30 A.M. has attribute type equal to time and has associated attribute selection expression. CSE executes select expression and creates attributes from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Since DATE has a UNIQUE flag, the CSE sets DATE as an index for the Appointment Calendar. The object now created is as follows:

#OBJECT APPOINTMENT
CALENDAR,PRIMITIVE,UPDATE,LEARN

select, INSTANT

(NEXT INSTANT) [DATE]+=1;(PREV INSTANT) [DATE]-=1

DATE,TYPE=d

DATE,TYPE=d,PTYPE=d,TEMP

09:00 A.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

10:00 A.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

11:00 A.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

12:00 P.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

1:00 P.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

2:00 P.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

3:00 P.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

4:00 P.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

5:00 P.M.,TYPE=C,LEN=66

Description

Type any information you want to include for this time slot.

NOTE,LEN=134, TYPE=C

Description

Type up to two lines of text as notes.

TODO,LEN=134, TYPE=C

Description

Type up to two lines of text for things to do.

#Index, APPOINTMENT CALENDAR,UNIQUE

The CSE activates the appointment calendar and sets active model to appointment calendar and proceeds to state 3.

State 3: Now since there is only one object, CSE sets appointment calendar as object and sets next state to state 4.

State 4: Since there is only one action associated with action control flags, CSE sets active action to UPDATE ADD and goes to state 5.

State 5: CSE sets all values of calendar to null. Because action instant type has action type flag of an active instant, CSE obtains index value date from user to instantiate the appointment book instant. Since there is a select expression, CSE executes select expression and select expression selects next date if event is "next" or "prev". Since event is "process" CSE obtains date from the user. If date was as result of "next" or "prev", CSE will skip the process of obtaining date from the user. In this case date is not set, so CSE obtains the date from the user using presentation interface. Assume user enters date value. CSE obtains the appointment calendar for the specified date. If appointment book for date exists it goes to state 6. Assume appointment book page does not exist. Since calendar has learn flag CSE sets active instant flag to EMPTY and action to ADD and sets next state to 6. This is where CSE differs from traditional programming systems. Since there is only one control flag associated with action ADD, CSE instantiates the appointment calendar via user interface. The user then modifies the appointment and returns an event assuming user selects an event "next". Since action is ADD and instant is EMPTY, CSE adds calendar for specific date using database interface. CSE then proceeds to state 6.

Please note that calendar records in the database appear to exist for all dates to user. In reality no data exists unless there is information in the appointment calendar for given date. This is significant because if one needs to use the database to build a calendar using the database management system, one must create empty records for all years. This can waste significant disk space. The action control flag learn makes it possible to create a database record when instant is instantiated and no record exists.

According to the invention, a user of the MICS simply writes information models rather than source code or the like. The information model 12 and functions 16 replace the common source code programs used in computer software systems of the prior art. To modify the operation of the program, the user need only change the information model and thus there is no software maintenance in the traditional sense. This approach is therefore radically different from prior art techniques and practices.

Thus a designer desiring to take advantage of the present invention builds models as opposed to applications, thereby allowing end users to create their own applications directly from the business model. As set forth above, a complete medical system is implemented using less than about 700 lines of an information model as compared to thousands upon thousands of lines of complex source code. The main processing engine of the MICS is the CSE machine in which each action creates an event, the event changes a state, and the state triggers an action. A model can be terminated during any state and can be restarted at the same state later. According to the invention, whenever a transaction is terminated, which may occur for example when another model is called for processing, the control engine saves the prior model and the state of the transaction. When the other processing is completed, the control engine reenters the previous transactions at the "action" level (as opposed to the instruction level). The control engine is thus reentrant at the action level.

In the preferred embodiment, the information model is defined with the assistance of a BNF grammar using an editor. The BNF grammar also facilitates dividing the application into a set of independent actions. The model is converted into information processing objects using a preprocessor or lexical analyzer that is based on the BNF grammar.

An application processing system such as MICS may be greatly enhanced by the inclusion of an expected behavior control system (EBCS) for automatically detecting and correcting the behavior of the actions implemented by the application programs where the expected behavior of the application programs is essentially independent of the application processing system. This allows the expected behavior to be modified without effecting the operation of the application processing system. An EBCS may operate in one of two manners. In a first application the EBCS conforms the behavior of the system to an expected behavior of the system defined by the EBCS. In a second application, a particular behavior may be enforced by the EBCS to alter the processing flow of the application processing system in a desired manner.

Referring now to FIG. 3, there is illustrated a preferred embodiment of the present invention. The application processing system 30 consists of an action processor 32 for executing application programs by executing one or more actions required by an application program. The execution of these actions generates a particular behavior. With respect to MICS, the action processor will comprise the control system engine and the application programs will consist of information models. An EBCS 34 interfaces with the action processor 32 and an external input/output 36. In most cases, the EBCS 34 executes after each execution of an application "action" which occurs during active instants (State 5) and process instants (State 6) of an application processing system 32 such as the MICS. However in some cases, execution of the EBCS may occur before execution of an action or expression to check for certain conditions affecting enforcement of a particular process flow. With respect to the ECBS the terms "rules", "expressions" and "actions" are synonymous unless otherwise specified.

The EBCS 34 comprises an expected behavior function (EBF) 38 for conforming or enforcing processing system behavior to expected behavior rules in response to the resulting behavior of an action initiated by the application program and a correction action function 40 for executing one or more corrective actions to conform or enforce the expected behavior if an expected behavior rule is not met. The expected behavior function 38 and correction action function 40 may be incorporated as separate rules or as a single rule without effecting the overall operation of the present invention. The expected behavior function 38 consists of a set of rules for determining whether or not an expected behavior for an executed application program action has occurred. This rule may either conform the behavior of the system to an expected behavior or enforce the processing flow of the actions in a desired manner. If the conditions set by the rules within the EBF 38 are not met, a correction ID number is returned which the correction action function 40 uses to enable an associated response for executing actions to achieve the expected behavior for the application processing system.

The expected behavior rules of the EBF verify specific behavior for actions initiated by the application programs and implement corrective actions for conforming or enforcing the expected behavior of the system when necessary. The expected behavior rules are divided into two groups, missing action rules and invalid action rules. The missing action rules search for specific behavior which should result in response to a particular action. The invalid action rules detect and correct behavior occurring which should not be occurring. A sample of these rules for conforming system behavior are as follows:

Missing action rules

1. If missing index key attribute value then execute action "correct specification to assign index key attribute value."

2. If instant contains cross reference and no cross reference is added to the database then execute action "correct specification to create cross reference."

Invalid action rules

1. If user instant and no attribute value change by the user and database update occurs the execute action "correct invalid propagation expression."

2. If loop condition in assignment of attribute values then execute action "terminate assignment loop condition."

The above described rules are not meant to be limiting, and any number of rules for conforming and correcting the expected behavior of the system may be used.

The following example is an application program corresponding to an information model of the MICS system described previously. This information model will be used to demonstrate the EBCS and its functionality.

______________________

#MODEL PAYMENT MANAGER #OBJECT BANK
ACCOUNT,ADD,UPDATE,REPORT ACT ID,UNIQUE,FPROT NAME ACCOUNT
NO BALANCE #OBJECT TRANSACTION,ADD,UPDATE,REPORT,JOURNAL
propagation ([ACT ID] NEQ "") [PAYEE] = [NAME] . CODE propagation ([*CODE] IS
"ICR") [REFRENCE] = 999999 . DATE PAYEE AMOUNT propagation ([AMOUNT
. CTYPE PAYEE DATE AMOUNT ACT ID #BALANCE CHECKBOOK, VIEW OF
TRANSACTION, BROWSE, REPORT select,ALL ([STATUS] is "O") . activation
([LAST BALANCE] IS ZERO) [LAST BALANCE] = [BALANCE] ; [LAST BALANCE] -=
[AMOUNT] . propagation [BALANCE] -= [AMOUNT] . CODE,ENTRY=15
PAYEE DATE AMOUNT LAST BALANCE,ENTRY=1 #INDEX TRANSACTION,ACT
ID
________________________

The following description illustrates a number of
cases wherein the trace for the operation of the EBCS to conform expected behavior can be
seen:

Case 1: Assume a user has selected the ADD action of the BANK ACCOUNT object. In execution of State
6 by the CSE, the database operation fails because ACT ID index key attribute value is
indexed but the value assignment for ACT ID never occurs because the field is protected
from data entry by the FPROT attribute flag and there is no propagation expression or
"action" to assign to the attribute value. Upon execution of the EBCS, conformance with the
EBCS missing action rule 1 is not achieved, and the correction action function executes
"correct specification to assign index key attribute value." Here EBCS correction actions of
the correction action function can automatically remove the FPROT attribute flag
from ACT ID attribute definition of BANK ACCOUNT to correct the problem without having the
user modify the information model, or EBCS correction actions can interact with the user
through the input/output interface by displaying the attribute definition and asking
the user to change the flag or add a propagation expression to correct the problem to
enforce the expected behavior.

Case 2: In the TRANSACTION object the JOURNAL flag instructs the CSE to activate the JOURNAL
object of TRANSACTION after a database operation. Assume that the user has selected the
ADD action of TRANSACTION. If the AMOUNT attribute value is not entered by the user, then
the CSE fails to create the JOURNAL database record because upon execution of the JOURNAL
object, no attribute value is changed because the propagation expression only changes attribute
conformance missing action rule number 2 is not achieved, and the correction
action function executes "correct specification to create cross reference." The
correction action can enforce the behavior by automatically adding the MUST FILL flag to the
attribute definition AMOUNT of TRANSACTION or EBCS correction actions can interact with the
user using input/output interface to ask the user to change the MUST FILL flag or modify the
propagation expression of the JOURNAL object to change at least one attribute value.

Case 3: Assume that the user has selected the ADD action and the user enters a CODE value equal to
ICR. The REFERENCE value then changes to 999999. This causes the AMOUNT value to become
negative, which in turn causes the REFERENCE value to change to 999999. This creates a loop
condition and conformance with the EBCS invalid rule 2 fails, and the EBCS executes
"terminate loop condition". The correction action function can conform the behavior by
automatically terminating the loop condition or asking the user to do so via the input/output
interface.

It is important to note that there is no fault in any processing portion of the information model
itself. The fault is in the information model specification. In a traditional software program,
the error would be in the program specifications and the process flow and not in
the actions executed in response to the program.

In addition to conforming the application processing system to a specific behavior, the
EBCS may also enforce processing flow of actions defined by the application programs to a
selected behavior. This enables the application processing system to operate in a new
manner without altering the databases or application programs as they exist. One example
of this enforcement of processing flow would be a method for enabling two users to update a
database record at the same time as long as the users were working on different attributes of
the record. Currently existing systems do not enable two users to update the same database
records concurrently.

Presently when an application requests use of a database record for updating purposes, the
application initiates a READ UPDATE action that reads the entry within the database and
locks the record into an UPDATE mode. During the READ UPDATE action, no other user may access
the database record. This is due to the fact that the READ UPDATE action initiated by the
application program generates a processing flow that only enables one user to access the
desired database. A new type of processing flow may be enforced by the EBCS by using a set
of enforcement rules similar to the conformance rules discussed previously. The
enforcement rules are different from the conformance rules in that they may be executed
both before and after the execution of an action. This is due to the fact that the expected
behavior for the action may be different depending upon the existing conditions.

Assume the following rules are also included within the EBCS:

1. If operation is READ UPDATE, then get record with READ without UPDATE and activate the instant.

2. If action is READ UPDATE, then wait until record is available for READ UPDATE and update
database record with attribute values of the instants which have been changed by the user
interface or progation expression.

Thus when a READ UPDATE action is executed by the application processing system the EBCS rule 1
causes the record to be read without update. This enables more than one user on the network or
client/server computing system to simultaneously update the same record without
locking the record during an update session. Upon completion of each user's modifications to a
record, each user's updates are returned to the database in accordance with rule 2. Rule
number 1 is a pre-enforcement rule executed before execution of an action to direct the
processing flow in a desired direction without altering the application programs. In
this case, the rule initiates only a READ action. Rule number 2 is a post-enforcement rule
reads the database record for UPDATE READ and modifies the record with the changes made by the
user.

Rules such as this enable multiple users to update a database record as long as different
attributes of the database record are being updated. In a normal processing system, whatever
changes are last made to the attribute values of a record are the changes that are finally used
within the database record. Should a conflict occur between multiple users trying to update the
same attribute during READ UPDATE actions, additional rules may be included in the EBCS to
enable resolution of the conflict. A rule may be included in the EBCS enforcing that whichever
user has entered the largest number of attribute value changes within a specific group
gets priority for all attribute value changes for that group. Thus, in the case where a first
user updates one attribute in the record of a first patient and five attributes within the
record of a second patient, and a second user only updates ten attributes within a record of
the second patient, the corrective actions force the changes made by the first user to
control and be entered into the first patient's record, and the attributes entered by
the second user to control and be entered into the second patient's record.

It should be noted from the foregoing discussion that none of the application programs are being
altered in any way. All that is altered is the manner in which the process flow of the
actions is carried out to enable new system behaviors to be achieved without reprogramming
the application programs. It should also be noted that the particular rules discussed for
enforcing process flow are merely illustrative and that any number of rules may be
used to achieve any desired behavior.

It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the specific embodiments disclosed above
may be readily utilized as a basis for modifying or designing other structures or
techniques for carrying out the same purposes of the present invention. It should also be
realized by those skilled in the art that such equivalent constructions do not depart from
the spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims.


  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )