About: Comparing Programming in POSH and GOAL A Comparative Study using Intelligent Virtual Agents     Goto   Sponge   Distinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : http://linked.opendata.cz/ontology/domain/vavai/Vysledek, within Data Space : linked.opendata.cz associated with source document(s)

AttributesValues
rdf:type
rdfs:seeAlso
Description
  • A variety of agent programming languages have been proposed in the literature but only few comparative studies have be en performed to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these languages. In order to gain a better understanding of the programming features and the use of these features by programmers it is imperative to perform studies on various programming tasks in these languages. Such studies advance our knowledge of the benefits of using agent-oriented languages and may contribute positively to the evolution of these languages. In this paper we report on a study that compares the performance of programmers on tasks that use the agent programming frameworks Goal and POSH. The aim of the study was to investigate any differences in usability of the frameworks as well as to study differences between novice and more advanced programmers using either framework. As POSH requires Java programming experience, we expected novice POSH programmers to perform better on the tasks than novice Goal programmers whereas we hypothesized this difference would not be observed between more advanced programmers. However, results suggest that there is no significant difference for the given tasks between both frameworks. They do suggest that general experience and tooling support is important though. Analysis of the tasks and the observations made about the use of the frameworks, moreover, suggests that the experimental design can be adapted in such a way that differences in usability of the frameworks can be established.
  • A variety of agent programming languages have been proposed in the literature but only few comparative studies have be en performed to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these languages. In order to gain a better understanding of the programming features and the use of these features by programmers it is imperative to perform studies on various programming tasks in these languages. Such studies advance our knowledge of the benefits of using agent-oriented languages and may contribute positively to the evolution of these languages. In this paper we report on a study that compares the performance of programmers on tasks that use the agent programming frameworks Goal and POSH. The aim of the study was to investigate any differences in usability of the frameworks as well as to study differences between novice and more advanced programmers using either framework. As POSH requires Java programming experience, we expected novice POSH programmers to perform better on the tasks than novice Goal programmers whereas we hypothesized this difference would not be observed between more advanced programmers. However, results suggest that there is no significant difference for the given tasks between both frameworks. They do suggest that general experience and tooling support is important though. Analysis of the tasks and the observations made about the use of the frameworks, moreover, suggests that the experimental design can be adapted in such a way that differences in usability of the frameworks can be established. (en)
Title
  • Comparing Programming in POSH and GOAL A Comparative Study using Intelligent Virtual Agents
  • Comparing Programming in POSH and GOAL A Comparative Study using Intelligent Virtual Agents (en)
skos:prefLabel
  • Comparing Programming in POSH and GOAL A Comparative Study using Intelligent Virtual Agents
  • Comparing Programming in POSH and GOAL A Comparative Study using Intelligent Virtual Agents (en)
skos:notation
  • RIV/00216208:11320/13:10173955!RIV14-GA0-11320___
http://linked.open...avai/riv/aktivita
http://linked.open...avai/riv/aktivity
  • P(GAP103/10/1287), S
http://linked.open...vai/riv/dodaniDat
http://linked.open...aciTvurceVysledku
http://linked.open.../riv/druhVysledku
http://linked.open...iv/duvernostUdaju
http://linked.open...titaPredkladatele
http://linked.open...dnocenehoVysledku
  • 66114
http://linked.open...ai/riv/idVysledku
  • RIV/00216208:11320/13:10173955
http://linked.open...riv/jazykVysledku
http://linked.open.../riv/klicovaSlova
  • comparative study; languages; virtual intelligent agents (en)
http://linked.open.../riv/klicoveSlovo
http://linked.open...ontrolniKodProRIV
  • [CED8E71A5E0A]
http://linked.open...v/mistoKonaniAkce
  • Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA
http://linked.open...i/riv/mistoVydani
  • USA
http://linked.open...i/riv/nazevZdroje
  • Proceedings Agents for Games and Simulations
http://linked.open...in/vavai/riv/obor
http://linked.open...ichTvurcuVysledku
http://linked.open...cetTvurcuVysledku
http://linked.open...vavai/riv/projekt
http://linked.open...UplatneniVysledku
http://linked.open...iv/tvurceVysledku
  • Brom, Cyril
  • Gemrot, Jakub
  • Hindriks, Koen
  • Korstanje, Rien
http://linked.open...vavai/riv/typAkce
http://linked.open.../riv/zahajeniAkce
number of pages
http://purl.org/ne...btex#hasPublisher
  • IFAAMAS
https://schema.org/isbn
  • 978-1-4503-1993-5
http://localhost/t...ganizacniJednotka
  • 11320
Faceted Search & Find service v1.16.118 as of Jun 21 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3240 as of Jun 21 2024, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (126 GB total memory, 77 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software