 |
Description  |
|
|
This application is a National Stage Application, filed under 35 U.S.C.
371, of PCT/FR92/01129. filed Dec. 2, 1992, now WO 93/11497, published
Jun. 10, 1993.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention concerns a process and a tool for conceptual modeling of
expertise on a computer system.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
From European patent 314 594, a conceptual design tool is known that uses a
top-down functional approach for the development of the hardware product.
This tool includes an inquiry system that enables the user to input each
component of a product. Such a system requires a prior description of the
components of the product and consequently is frozen for a single
application.
Also known from U.S. Pat. No. 4,964,063 is a method of operating a data
processing system with conceptual structures that can be used to represent
all knowledge that can be represented by elements such as concept data,
relational data, functional calculation bits, knowledge representation
function bits and symbolic access code bits. The symbolic access code bits
represent the storage addresses of the memory means for the attached
conceptual data, the relational data and the function code bits.
This method uses the data processing system to link the concept data and
the relational data into conceptual graphs which can be shown on the means
of display.
This method provides for a breakdown by unit name, slot name, facet name
and class or superclass. Such a method, while it permits a description of
certain objects of the conceptual model, does not provide a structure of
the model that is a guide for gathering and interpreting knowledge, while
permitting the search for modularity, reusability and genericity of the
elements of the model. The genericity of a model or parts of a model being
the property of furnishing a guide to the knowledge-gathering and
interpretation process, so that the process is reduced to "instancing" the
generic model, namely adding factual information for the field of
application to it.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
An initial goal of the invention is achieved by a process for conceptual
modeling of expertise on a computer system that has a CPU, a central
memory and a display device working in multiwindows graphics mode, with
each window equipped with a system of local coordinates and a pointer
means in a window, at least one active zone capable of reacting to at
least one unit of information constituted by an outside event; said active
zone is combined with a group of initial functions called editors that
have at least a second reaction function; with activation characterized by
the fact that it consists of combining at least one window with a
predefined number of conceptual objects constituting a body of knowledge
organized on four expertise modeling layers, with each window making it
possible to take into account connections between the different conceptual
objects, and updating or modifying a conceptual object automatically
updates the connections.
According to another special feature, the conceptual objects are composed
of relation, function, operator, role, procedure and goal concepts.
According to another special feature, the process includes a step combining
a window for creation of a glossary which is then used to define the
objects to be described.
According to another special feature, each window has as an active zone a
"more" box allowing it to expand the number of fields of information
present in the window.
According to another special feature, each window has a display step for
the field indicating the connections of an object with the other objects.
According to another special feature, each window has as an active zone a
"less" box allowing it to restrict the size of the window and the
information displayed in it to the basic information.
According to another special feature, the creation of the glossary includes
the following steps:
displaying of a glossary window and a database window arranged in a
hierarchy where the knowledge documented and input into memory is
displayed,
highlighting words of the documented knowledge selected for the glossary in
a database window,
transferring the word to the glossary by selecting a transfer arrow, and
editing connections between the glossary and the documented database.
DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Other characteristics and advantages of the invention will be more readily
understood upon reading the description below, with reference to the
figures, in which:
FIG. 1 represents a structure of the expertise model;
FIG. 2 represents an AND/OR-type graph of the strategy layer and the task
layer;
FIG. 3 represents an inference structure;
FIG. 4 represents the different windows manipulated by the system and
associated with each object editor;
FIG. 5 represents the basic windows for each layer of the body of
knowledge; and
FIG. 6 represents the windows for accessing each of the functions of the
software or the conceptual model.
FIG. 7 represents the windows for the graphical representation of the
inference strucutres.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Before going on to a detailed description of the process in the invention,
we shall specify the computer system on which the invention is used; this
system has a central processing unit, a central memory, a display device
working in multiwindows graphic mode and a pointer means in a window, at
least one active zone capable of reacting to at least one unit of
information constituted by an outside event. This means can be
advantageously composed, for example, of a mouse whose left button is
assigned by convention to selections of graphic object zones on the screen
and to calling up the editors of the invention; the right button is
assigned to specific operations, such as manipulating certain menus. The
outside events coming from the mouse are processed by the preprogrammed
mouse interface, which can also recognize the down or up of a button, the
drag of the mouse and logic events, such as the entry of the mouse pointer
in the window. On the screen, the position of the pointer of the mouse is
marked by a small arrow pointing up. Of course, without going beyond the
framework of the invention, the mouse could be replaced by any other
pointing device, such as an optical pen or a graphics table. The invention
also includes a four-level model management program, which makes it
possible to create, save, change and print these models in paper format.
This software functions in a multiwindows environment and before
describing each window associated with an object of the conceptual model,
we will describe the structure of the conceptual model, which is composed
of a group of goals, a group of perceptions/actions and a body of
knowledge, as shown in FIG. 1.
The goal group (10) is composed of outside goals, which are basic goals and
goals that can be broken down. The goals describe the operational
objectives of the expert task to be automated. They are propositions on
the status and the future of the environment in which the rational agent
is acting.
The rational agent designates the type of system described in terms of
knowledge. The concept model of the expertise describes the three
components of a rational agent, which are the group of
perceptions/actions, the group of goals and the body of knowledge.
The goals arranged explicitly in this group (10), outside goals as opposed
to other goals (inside goals) which are defined directly in the strategy
layer of the body of knowledge.
The group of perceptions/actions (11) describes the means of interaction
with the environment available for performing the expert task to be
automated. The perceptions are characterized by the types of objects
perceived, see below. The actions are characterized by the object of the
action and by the function which describes the transformation carried out
by the action.
The body of knowledge is structured in four layers, a strategy layer (12),
a task layer (13), an inference layer (14) and a field layer (15). The
field layer (15) contains conceptual objects used to describe the entities
in the field of application, the relations and the functions between those
entities, as well as their properties. The conceptual objects in the field
level are referenced by all the other layers (inference, task, strategy).
These objects are the concepts (150), the relations (151) and the
functions (152).
A concept (150) describes a concrete or abstract entity class. A concrete
entity is directly linked to a perception or action. The list of concrete
concepts from the list of perceptions/actions limits the operational range
of the expertise to be modeled. The abstract entity is not directly
concerned with a perception or action. The abstract concepts come from
abstractions produced in the constructive process of interpretation and
modeling of the reasoning. The concepts are arranged in a hierarchy of
specialization, thus the concept "loss of level" in an application belongs
to the "anomaly" hierarchy of specialization for that application.
Appendix 1 contains the different concepts associated with the modeling for
an expert system for help in the sale of travel agency products.
A relation (151) is an n-ary predicate. This predicate denotes a relation
in the mathematical sense, i.e., a group of n-tuples. The relations cover
objects and the relations themselves. (The objects participating in an
n-tuple can also be n-tuples.) A relation, for example "Near" (21,
Appendix 2), has a list of fields, for example (Trip, Date) which may be
named with names that are local in range for the relation and
characterized by concepts or relations and potentially a description in
the form of a group of clauses. A relation can be specialized. A
specialized relation has the same arity and the same numbers of fields as
the relation that it specializes (called its generic relation). The types
of fields must be specializations (subconcepts or specialized relations)
of the types of fields in its generic relation.
Appendix 2 shows the different relations between the concepts in Appendix
1, for example, the relation "compatible," specialized for the concept
"product" and the attribute "budget" of the concept "limited." The
mechanism of specialization of the relations makes it easier to save names
and share properties. Thus, for some applications (shown in FIG. 7), it
can be interesting to define a cause-effect relation between instances of
"anomaly" which represents a hypothetical or real dysfunction with its
characteristics and its temporal occurrence, as a generic relation.
In reality, each subconcept of anomaly (fall, power failure, increase in
speed, etc.) can concur with a cause-effect type relation with other
subconcepts. In fact, for each pair of anomalies which is in a
cause-effect relation, it is necessary to indicate the conditions that
cause the relation to be established really. Each of these pairs thus
defines a relation which is in fact a specialization of the generic
cause-effect relation in the sense that it inherits a certain number of
its properties (syntactic, like its name, its arity, the names of the
fields and semantic like, for example, the property that in the theory of
causality chosen, the cause always temporally precedes the effect). Each
specialized relation has a description which takes into account exactly
the conditions for establishing such a relation for the anomaly pair in
question. This information is documented in the following way.
relation
name-relation: cause-effect
fields: <cause,anomaly>,<effect,anomaly>!
description: {cause-effect (x,y) .rarw.-precedes(interval(x), interval(y))}
specialized relation
generic relation: cause-effect
types-of-fields: <cause, loading-failure>, <effect, loss-of-level>!
description: . . . specialized relation
generic relation: cause-effect
field: <cause, fall>, <effect,loss-of-level>!
description: . . .
A graph showing the cause-effect relation between functional anomaly of a
process is presented in the right window in FIG. 7.
A function (152) is an application in the mathematical sense of the term
(particularly, a single image corresponds to each n-tuple of value of the
parameters). To each n-ary function corresponds a (n+1)-ary relation (in
which the result is the (n+1)-th field. A function can have a relational
visibility (the inverse is not true):
(x,y,z)(F(x,y)=z<=>F(x,y,z))
A function has a list of arguments which may have names that are local in
range and types which are concepts and potentially a description by means
of a language of functional expressions close to the language currently
used in scholarly mathematical texts.
An example of function is shown in Appendix 3 by the reference (1520).
The functions, like the relations, can be specialized. A specialized
function inherits the name and the list of arguments of the function that
it specializes (its generic function), the types of parameters and the
result being subconcepts of the types of its generic function; its
description can also be specialized. An example of specialized function is
shown below:
specialized function
generic function: Plus
types-parameters: <integral, integral>
type-result: integral
description: {Plus(x,0)=x, Plus (x,Succ(y))=Succ (Plus(x,y))}
The "Plus" function applied to the integrals has a specialized definition
compared to the more generic one defined for the numbers. The description
is given in terms of functional equations. It is a constructive definition
from the function "Succ" defined elsewhere.
The concepts can be equipped with attributes. An attribute of a concept is
nothing more than a unary function whose argument is marked by the concept
and the name has a range local to the concept. The attributes are
inherited in the specialization hierarchy.
attribute:=name-attribute type-result description
name-attribute:=symbol
type-result:=concept
description:=(a description of the same type as that of the functions.)
The inherited attributes can be specialized in two ways: specialization of
the type of result and a new description.
The choice of defining a unary function as an attribute and not as a
function is a question of evaluation, knowing that an attribute bears
information connected locally with a concept (and with its subconcepts).
The inference layer (14) describes the transformations of the conceptual
objects of the field layer dictated by the inference steps and the
information flow charts on which these transformations are recorded.
The concept objects of the inference layer are the inference structures,
the operators and the roles.
The inference structures describe the flow charts (shown in FIG. 3) of
information between operators (301 to 306) and the roles (311 to 318).
These inference structures do not convey any information on the sequences
of application of the operators, but only highlight the limits imposed by
the flow chart. The inference structures have a specific graphic
representation. One example is presented in the left window in FIG. 7. The
operators (knowledge sources) describe the inference relations between
concept instances and relations (an instance of a concept and an instance
of a relation, n-ary is an n-tuple belonging to the extension of the
relation). An operator "consumes" and "produces" instances of concepts and
relations. The operators can be primitive or structured.
A structured operator has a list of operands and a result. The operands and
the result are called roles. Its description is given by an inference
structure which has the special property that the only node without
successors is the result of the structured operator described and the only
nodes without predecessors are the operands of the operator. The operators
which appear in the inference structure can in turn be primitive or
structured.
A primitive operator makes it possible to describe a "basic" transformation
that it is no longer interesting to break down by means of an inference
structure. The nature of the description of a primitive operator is still
a subject of discussion. Specifically the point is to find out whether it
is necessary to describe the corresponding inference relation by its
abstract properties (the properties of the operands and the result), or in
a constructive way, by indicating the calculating mechanisms that do the
transformation. These mechanisms can be described either in an algorithmic
language or by means of a group of production rules, or in other
formalisms.
The roles (38) of the examples of primitive operators explained in Appendix
5 are given in Appendix 4. These roles are the operands and the results of
the operators. A role has a name and a list of concepts or relations for
the field that play the standard "roles" of the operands and the results
of the operators.
The task layer (13) describes a first level of control of the
interferences. In fact, the task layer describes the control graph of the
primitive operators defined in the inference layer which contains the
description of their flow chart.
This control graph is described by means of conceptual objects in the task
layer which are the procedures (also called tasks and methods). The
procedures are "programs" written in a non-standard imperative/procedural
language, which applies the primitive operators defined in the inference
layer to the instances of concepts and relations.
The "present adapted products" procedure in Appendix 6 writes the operators
contained in the "determine product" inference structure in FIG. 3 into a
control graph which is shown by reference 5301 in the procedure window 53
in FIG. 5.
Most of the models developed today have as their object relatively simple
applications, in which a fine description in the strategy layer is
redundant. In such cases, one can describe the "general" behavior of the
agent in an entirely procedural way. This has caused a resumption of the
discussion of the very existence of the strategy layer (12). However, in
wide-ranging applications, using several expert "tasks" (monitoring,
diagnosis, planning) and the contextual use of knowledge, the strategy
layer (12) is a basic component of the expertise model.
The concept objects of the strategy level are the internal goals (120). The
external goals are those which are defined in terms of the overall
component of the goals of the rational agent. In the strategy layer, these
goals are arranged in a graph (FIG. 2) breaking down the goals. Other
goals (the internal goals) come from the breakdown "export" goals into
subgoals and are defined directly in the strategy layer of the body of
knowledge.
The goals are propositions on the state and the outcome of the environment
in which the rational agent evolves The states and the evolution of the
environment can and must, for reasons of synthesis and overall visibility,
be expressed abstractly (not simply as configurations of values of the
perceptions in time). This abstract representation must always be able to
be brought back to a concrete representation. From a concrete state,
namely a configuration of the values of the perceptions, one must be able
to determine in an unambiguous way the corresponding abstract state.
The conceptual objects of the strategy layer (12) (whether external or
internal (120)) are distinguished by goals that can be broken down and
basic goals.
A goal that can be broken down (121 or 123 in FIG. 2) is an intermediate
node of the graph of the goals; it has a type (AND/OR) a list of sub-goals
(124, 125) and it can be annotated by a group of optional rules (1210,
1230) between sub-goals (0R goal) or relaxation of sub-goals (AND goal).
These rules make it possible to choose the sub-goal to be set (OR node) or
the sub-goal not to be set (AND node) contextually to the state of the
environment.
A basic goal (122, 124, 125) can no longer be broken down (reasonably) into
sub-goals. It can only be reached by executing a procedure (task layer).
When several methods can be envisaged to reach a basic goal, the
procedures that describe these methods will be attached to this basic
goal.
Note that the layers of the body of knowledge maintain relations which have
some interesting properties. If they are arranged in a total order (from
top to bottom: strategy, task, inference, field), we see that the objects
of one layer refer (by name) to the objects of the same layer or lower
layers, but never to objects in higher layers. Some interesting properties
of a conceptual model can be reduced to properties of the graph of
references between conceptual objects.
A conceptual model is down-related if, for each goal, there is at least one
path on the graph oriented by references starting from the goal in
question and leading to an action. A conceptual model is up-related if for
each perception or action there is at least one path on the graph oriented
by references starting from a goal and leading to the perception/action in
question.
A conceptual model is related if it is down-related and up-related.
A conceptual model is economical if, for each object in the body of
knowledge, there is at least one path in the graph not oriented from the
references between a goal and a perception/action that goes by the object
in question.
The property of connection of a model guarantees that each goal is
"processed" and that each perception/action is used. Obviously, it does
not guarantee the semantic completeness of the body of knowledge or the
pertinence of the references.
The property of economy of a model guarantees the absence of unused
conceptual objects. Control of the properties of connection and economy is
part of the verification and validation activities. Connection is a
measurement of conformity and completeness, while economy is interesting
above all in terms of readability and maintainability.
The expertise model structure, as well as the availability of generic
conceptual objects, is a guide for gathering and interpreting the
expertise. The problem that is raised is how to attack the construction of
the model and the structure in layers of the body of knowledge.
From outside to inside (outside-in), the body of knowledge is attacked from
the goals and the perceptions/actions. A complete list of the external
goals is made, as well as the perceptions/actions which are, a priori, at
the disposal of the rational agent. The modeling continues by making a
tree of the goals and by defining the internal sub-goals. Along with this,
the concrete entities are modeled (objects of the actions and
perceptions), as well as the relations and functions in which they appear.
The states mentioned in the goal give an initial modeling of the abstract
entities. From the tree of goals, outlines of procedures (task layer) are
defined and hence operators, which form the elements of the inference
layer.
from the inside-out:
This is the so-called approach by models of interpretation. Having quickly
identified one or more generic inference structures (diagnosis, planning .
. . ), one uses them as a guide to build the inference and task layers.
The movement is then up (the strategy layer) and down (the field layer),
up to the external goals and the perceptions/actions.
from the top down:
One starts with the goals of the system and goes down through the layers,
passing through the tree of sub-goals, the definition of the procedures
attached to the basic goals, the definition of the inference structures
and the operators and then concepts and relations which mark the goals.
This is an approach guided by the processing.
from the bottom up:
One starts from the description of the concepts and relations in the field
and one goes up through the layers to the strategy layer. This is an
approach guided by the data.
This typology is abstract, in the sense that each of these approaches is
literally only one view of the idea. In reality, the step really taken
will always be mixed. The outside-in step is adapted above all to new and
difficult problems, while the inside-out step (by interpretation models)
is adapted to stereotypical problems.
The advantage of the invention is to allow the adoption of any step and to
change the step during the description of the model.
This is permitted by a multiwindows environment, with direct manipulation
on the graphic work station. The invention has tools for helping organize
the encyclopedia of expertise and the construction of the conceptual
model.
Thus the software offers the possibility of manipulating the objects of the
expertise model with tools that help edit, organize, consult and manage.
A first family with a group of graphics editors makes it possible to
display a window for each conceptual object per se in the different layers
of the model; the window facilitates and guides the acquisition of the
properties of the object and the connections authorized between that
object and the other objects of the same layer or other layers. Thus, a
first window (30) makes-it possible to describe the functions (152) which
belong to the field (15). This window (30) displays on the menu band the
name of the function which is entered in a first active zone (301)
entitled "Name." A second active zone (302) of this window (30) has an
ascender (3020) which makes it possible, when this zone is filled, to
select one of the parameters in this second zone (302), for example, with
the help of the "remove" box (3021) to eliminate the parameter selected,
or with the help of the "add" box (3022), to add a parameter at the place
pointed. A third active zone (303) "result" enables the operator to write
the result corresponding to the function that he is in the process of
specifying. Thus, if one refers to the function "length" (152) in Appendix
3, this box (303) will have the information "integer." Then a last active
zone (304) "description" allows the user to enter the description of the
function on the keyboard. A "cancel" box (305) makes it possible, when
activated, to cancel the operation carried out in the window (30), an
"update" box (306) when activated makes it possible to update the contents
of the memory on the basis of information entered from the keyboard in the
different active zones and to edit the connections between the different
objects of the model, displaying in the other objects the connections that
the object described can have to the objects already described. A "more"
box (307) makes it possible to expand the display in the window to other
additional information, as we shall see below in connection with the
relation window. Finally, the boxes (309) have "guide," "library" and
"quit function editor" (30) functions.
A second window (200) makes it possible to edit the relations (151) in the
field layer (15). This window includes active zones (201, 202, 204)
identical to the active zones (301, 302, 304) in the function window. The
active zone (202) makes it possible to describe the fields of each
relation and to design the concepts attached to these fields. The window
has in its active zone (201) the name of the "near" relation (21, Appendix
2) which is made up of the "date" (16, Appendix 1) and the "trip" (11,
Appendix 1) fields, which are concepts that will be described each in a
respective concept editing window (100). Similarly, an active box (205)
makes it possible to cancel what has been written in the active zones of
the window (200); the box (206) makes it possible to update the contents
of the memory and the connections between the different objects in the
different layers; the "less" box (2080) makes it possible to reduce the
window to the minimum size constituted by the display of the active zones
"menu" (200), "name" (201), "field" (202) and "description" (204). In the
illustrated expanded display of window (200), commanded by activating a
"more" button from a contracted display of the window (200) (not
illustrated), the relation window (200) as shown in FIG. 4, has an active
zone (2081) that includes cross references to the inferences. The
contracted display is commanded by activation of the "less" button (2080).
An ascender (20810) makes it possible in this "references crossed with
inferences" (2081) active zone to select a location; and "remove" (20811)
and "add" (20812) boxes make it possible respectively to remove or add
cross references to inferences. A "list" box (20813) makes it possible to
list and display the inferences of the model; an "edit" box (20814) makes
it possible to edit the inference selected by the ascender (20810) and
thus go directly to the display of a window (140), making it possible to
edit the inference selected in the active zone of the "inference cross
references" helping describe the relation being displayed. Similarly, an
additional active zone (2082) makes it possible to design the cross
references to the fields and to indicate at the places selected by the
ascender (20820) the concept to be added or removed from this description.
Thus, this active zone (2082) makes it possible to establish connections
between the relation and the concepts in the field, while the preceding
active zone (2081) makes it possible to establish connections with the
inference structures of the inference layer. Here again, in this window
describing a relation of the model, the addition or removal of an
inference or of a field, after selecting the "update" box (206), starts an
automatic update of the connections which can appear in the inferences or
the fields connected to that relation.
A third type of window (100) makes it possible to edit the concepts in the
field. This third type of window (100) is composed in the same way as the
function (30) and relation (200) windows, of three active zones; a first
zone (101) making it possible to write in the name of the concept; a
second (102) making it possible to define the attributes to be added or
removed from the concept; and a third (104) to define the description of
the concept. Like the "field" (202) and "parameter" (502) zones, the
active zone "attributes" (102) has an ascender (1020) and the "remove"
(1021) and "add" (1022) boxes. The activation boxes (105, 106, 107) have
functions identical to the functions of the activation boxes (305 to 307)
and the boxes (109) of the functions identical to the activation boxes
(209,309).
A fourth type of window (130) makes possible a description of the
procedures in the task layer. Like the preceding windows, this window has
active zones (1301) for defining the name of the procedure, (1304)
describing the procedure, (1305) canceling the information entered, (1306)
updating data and connections associated with the procedure, (1307)
enlarging information displayed by the window and boxes (1309) making it
possible to display the "guide" function, the library or to quit this
editor. In addition, this procedure window (130) has an active zone (1308)
which makes it possible to display the references of the inferences to
which these procedures refer and with the "edit" function (13084) to edit
the corresponding inference graph. As in the active zone (2081) of the
relation window, this active zone also has an activation box "remove"
(13081) to remove a reference to an inference and a "list" box (13083) to
list the inferences and (13082) to add an inference at the position
indicated by the up arrow (13080).
Similarly, the fifth goal window (124) has the active zones (1241) to show
the name of the goal, (1244) to describe the goal, (1243) to designate the
type of goal and (1248) to designate the procedures with which this goal
can be associated. The active zone (1248) is the same type as the active
zone (1308) of the procedure window (130). Similarly, this goal window has
the cancel (1245) and update (1246) boxes and the boxes (1249) for the
same functions as the boxes (309).
A sixth inference-editing window (140) has a menu bar (141) making it
possible with an activate box (1412) to quit the editor, with an
activatable "graph" box (1413) to create a graph, with a "file" box (1414)
to display the inference files, with a "filter" box (1415) to filter . . .
, with a "help" box (1416) to guide the user and with a "read" box (1417)
to scan the inference. This window has a second active zone (142) which
has a creation box which makes it possible to create a new inference graph
and a third active zone action (143) which includes the classic editing,
printing, move, remove and copy boxes, as well as a note box for putting
notes with an operator or a role.
Ascenders (144, 145) allow moving and/or enlarging the main window (146).
The graph created for the inference considered appears in the window
(146). Thus, if we take the inference graph shown in FIG. 3, the window
(146) can correspond to the description of the operator (306) "to check
the limits," role 1 (316) to the "product-candidate" concept, role 2
"client-limit" (317), which is the "limit" type of concept, and role 3
"optimal product" (318), which is the "product" type of concept.
The zones (141, 142, 143, 144, 145) of the inference window are the same
type as the zones of the root windows (51 to 54) which make it possible to
define the inference graphs (5188) for each of the inferences which make
it possible to define the graphs of goals (526), for each of the goals
defined for the model, the procedure graphs (5300) for the procedure root
window (53) and the fields for the window (54).
These windows also make it possible to display and call up the strategy
files in the root window goals (52). The inference files (517) in the root
window inference (51), like the root window procedure (53), which makes it
possible to define the graphs for calling up the procedure (5300) for
procedure 1, (5301) for procedure 2, (5302) for procedure 3. A last root
window (54) makes it possible to assemble in its central zone (546) and to
display the different objects "concepts," "function," "relation" which
constitute the field of expertise as well as the different files in the
field. This window also has different activation zones that let you either
trace graphs, or edit, or print or create new objects that go in the
field.
Finally, at start-up, the software has a display of the icon (60) shown in
FIG. 6 which makes it possible to call up with icon (600) the window (61),
with the icon (601) the "model" window (62) and with the icon (602) the
windows appearing in FIGS. 5. The input window (61) in the software lets
you use the boxes load (610), create (611) and save (612) to define the
operation to be carried out and radio buttons (614) to define the object
on which the operation will be carried out if it is a glossary, a
conceptual model or maintenance documents to form the expertise model. The
edit, print, export and note boxes (613) make it possible to carry out the
operations above on one of the objects in the window.
Lastly, this window is supplemented by | | |
