[Apologies for Cross-Posting]
At DISP Lab, at Lyon, France, we have a PhD opening on « Ensuring Interoperability for
"smart" information systems". More information are following.
What is important is that all the development will be done using Pharo/Moose.
If you are interested, please contact me by answering this mail.
Ph.D. thesis (CIFRE)
Berger Levrault and DISP Lab, Lyon, France
Title: Ensuring Interoperability for "smart" information systems
Enterprise: Berger Levrault
Research Laboratory: DISP Lab
Where: Lyon, France
Recruitment date: As soon as possible
Application deadline: As soon as possible
Function: 3 years PhD candidate position in Berger Levrault (CDI). The position will be
part time between Berger Levrault and DISP Lab.
Research topic : data interoperability, application exchange protocols, service-oriented
architecture, event architecture, semantics, monitoring.
The need for sharing, exchanging and promoting information from information systems is
constantly increasing and now represents a major concern in the various reforms of the
local public sector (consolidation of local authorities, implementation of in place in
2016 Hospital Group Territory, Digital Republic). It is therefore essential to design
"platforms" capable of providing answers to the rationalisation and
simplification of data exchanges between software applications and with the outside world
to promote and simplify the application of all these reforms.
In addition, service-oriented architectures and event architectures (SOA, EDA) are mature
and widely used. At Berger-Levrault, their implementation ensures the scalability and
maintainability of solutions. These architectures are characterised by the flexibility and
the loose coupling of the subsystems that compose them (ie services, applications, IS ...)
and rely on several means (Hohpe & Woolf, 2004) to route the data within this network
of systems communicating. At this stage of maturity, we observe that these data exchanges
are operational and meet the requirements of interoperability between heterogeneous
systems (Leal, 2019).
Nevertheless, the number of standards recognised and used by the French public sector, the
privileged sector of Berger-Levrault, increases the level of interconnection difficulties
(Kurniawan & Ashari, 2015) of the different solutions developed by Berger-Levrault.
This is all the more remarkable when it comes to communicating with external solutions or
platforms (partners and / or competitors). This multiplicity of exchanges and types of
exchanges generates a great deal of complexity and highlights the need to master the
exchange system as effectively as possible. Berger Levraut today lacks visibility on
existing exchanges and mechanisms to evaluate them (Leal, Guédria, & Panetto, 2019)
which complicates the detection of dysfunctions and the discovery of their origins.
Moreover, it is essential for the Berger-Levrault applications to be able to adapt to the
new rules and standards while continuing to integrate the dematerialization of the public
service. The evolution of these modalities has an almost systematic impact on the exchange
of data put in place to ensure interoperability. Hence the need to build flexible and
scalable exchange architectures and to follow the evolution of these exchanges.
These transformations imply a large volume of data exchanged and subject to variations
that can be strong during periods of "high attendance" such as elections by
electronic vote. The very nature of exchanges can be affected especially with the
multiplicity of connected objects (Buyya & Dastjerdi, 2016). These are increasingly
used by public institutions for the benefit of the management of city facilities or user
services. The increase in volumes of data exchanged therefore implies the implementation
of exchange architectures that are able to support the load but also the great variability
of the types and frequencies of data production. This requires distributed architectures
(in infrastructure and flow), adaptable or even self-adaptable (Gascon-Samson et al 2015)
to promote the system's resistance to faults while avoiding potential congestion
Based on this reflection, a research project was conducted in partnership by
Berger-Levrault and the DISP laboratory (Amokrane et al., 2018). These early works have
identified a set of scientific and technical barriers:
• Lack of visibility on existing interoperability exchanges. Indeed, the current exchanges
are not traced and the existing monitoring mechanisms focus mainly on low level
information, such as the performance of the infrastructure or the use of the memory,
without correlation with business information. In addition, few methods for evaluating
interoperability are concerned with the effective evaluation (a posteriori of the
implementation) of the interoperability of the data, and few of them are tooled (Leal,
Guédria, & Panetto, 2019).
• The complexity of trade maintenance. This is due to the lack of traceability of the
exchanges, on the one hand, and that of the evolution of the exchange architecture
configurations on the other hand. This complicates the identification of failures or
dysfunctions and the analysis of their causes, and poses difficulties for the setting up
of mechanisms of alerts or significant notifications. In addition, the lack of
capitalisation of information relating to trade does not allow to consider a forecast
• The development of the different modules of the exchange system is manual and the
remediation of malfunctions is done in an ad hoc manner. In addition to the cost of
development and correction that this implies, this does not meet the responsiveness
requirements of some business areas. Hence the need to build adaptable exchange systems
using dynamic interoperability hubs (Agostinho, et al., 2016).
The objective of this thesis proposal is to produce an approach to the implementation
cycle of application exchanges, from design to maintenance, which will enhance the
reliability and resilience of the interoperability exchange system. The solution will
ultimately orchestrate all the application and service exchanges to ensure optimisation of
the use of software and infrastructure resources of public institutions.
To meet the needs in terms of interoperability, the work to be carried out is articulated
in two axes that we structure as follows:
- A flexible architecture for the implementation of interoperability. Here we consider the
basic functionalities reflecting the activities necessary for the establishment of the
means of interoperability.
- A reflexive architecture for managing interoperability at a meta-level. This axis
relates to setting up means of administration, monitoring and maintenance of the exchange
network set up for interoperability.
The work must also incorporate the concepts of security, scalability and usability.
Requirements to be met when developing any solution to lift the locks and meet the
objectives of this thesis work.
Agostinho, C., Ducq, Y., Zacharewicz, G., Sarraipa, J., Lampathaki, F., Poler, R., &
Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2016). Towards a sustainable interoperability in networked
enterprise information systems: Trends of knowledge and model-driven technology. Computers
in Industry, 79, 64 - 76. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2015.07.001
Al-Dhuraibi, Y., Paraiso, F., Djarallah, N., & Merle, P. (2017). Elasticity in cloud
computing: state of the art and research challenges. IEEE Transactions on Services
Computing, (pp. 430-447).
Amokrane, N., Laval, J., Lanco, P., Derras, M., & Moalla, N. (2018). Analysis of Data
Exchanges, Contribution to Data Interoperability Assessment. 9th international Conference
on Intelligent Systems 2018. Madeira, Portugal.
Andary, J. F., & Sage, A. P. (2010). The role of service oriented architectures in
systems engineering. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 9(1), 47-74.
Belfadel, A., Laval, J., Cherifi, C., & Moalla, N. (2018). Towards service
orchestration through software capability profile. I-ESA Interoperability for Enterprise
Systems and Applications 2018. Berlin, Germany.
Bernus, P., Goranson, T., Gøtze, J., Jensen-Waud, A., Kandjani, H., Molina, A., . . .
Turner, P. (2016). Enterprise engineering and management at the crossroads. Computers in
Industry, 79, 87 - 102. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2015.07.010
Buyya, R., & Dastjerdi, A. V. (2016). Internet of Things: Principles and paradigms.
Cabot, J., Clarisó, R., Brambilla, M., & Gérard, S. (2017). Cognifying model-driven
software engineering. Federation of International Conferences on Software Technologies:
Applications and Foundations (pp. pp. 154-160). Springer.
Chappell, D. (2004). Enterprise Service Bus. : O'Reilly Media, Inc.
Cheung, A. K., & Jacobsen, H. A. (2010). Load balancing content-based
publish/subscribe systems. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS).
Chhun, S., Moalla, N., & Ouzrout, Y. (2016). QoS ontology for service selection and
reuse. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 27(1), 187-199.
Crosby, M., Pattanayak, P., Verma, S., & Kalyanaraman, V. (2016). Blockchain
technology: Beyond bitcoin. Applied Innovation, 2(6-10).
Curry, E. (2004). Message-oriented middleware, Middleware for communications,.
Czarnecki, K., Eisenecker, U., Glück, R., Vandevoorde, D., & Veldhuizen, T. (2000).
Generative programming and active libraries. Generic Programming (pp. pp. 25-39). Berlin,
Erl, T. (2005). Service-oriented architecture: concepts, technology, and design. Prentice
Hall Professional Technical Reference.
Fahad, M., Moalla, N., & Bouras, A. (2012). Detection and resolution of semantic
inconsistency and redundancy in an automatic ontology merging system. Journal of
Intelligent Information Systems, 39(2), 535-557.
Fahad, M., Moalla, N., Bouras, A., Abdul Qadir, M., & Farukh, M. (2011). Towards
Classification of Web Ontologies for the Emerging Semantic Web. Journal of Universal
Computer Science, 17(7), 1021-1042.
Fülöp, L. J., Tóth, G., Rácz, R., Pánczél, J., Gergely, T., Beszédes, A., & Farkas, L.
(2010). Survey on complex event processing and predictive analytics. the Fifth Balkan
Conference in Informatics, (pp. pp. 26-31).
Gascon-Samson, J., Garcia, F. P., Kemme, B., & Kienzle, J. (2015). Dynamoth: A
scalable pub/sub middleware for latency-constrained applications in the cloud. In 2015
IEEE 35th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems , (pp. pp. 486-496).
Gokhale, A., Schmidt, D. C., Natarajan, B., & Wang, N. (2002). Applying
model-integrated computing to component middleware and enterprise applications.
Communications of the ACM, (pp. 65-70).
Hachicha, M., Moalla, N., Fahad, M., & Ouzrout, Y. (2015). Performance assessment
architecture for collaborative business processes in BPM-SOA based environments.
International journal of Data & Knowledge Engineering, 105, 73-89.
Hohpe, G., & Woolf, B. (2004). Enterprise integration patterns: Designing,building,
and deploying messaging solutions. Addison-Wesley Professional.
Khare, S., Sun, H., Zhang, K., Gascon-Samson, J., Gokhale, A., Koutsoukos, X., &
Abdelaziz, H. (2018). Scalable edge computing for low latency data dissemination in
topic-based publish/subscribe. In 2018 IEEE/ACM Symposium on Edge Computing (SEC) (pp. pp.
Kurniawan, K., & Ashari, A. (2015). Service orchestration using enterprise service bus
for real-time government executive dashboard system. 2015 International Conference on Data
and Software Engineering (ICoDSE), (pp. 207-212). Yogyakarta.
Laval, J., Cherifi, C., & Cheutet, V. (2018). Towards the measurement of Enterprise
Information Systems agility to support EIS improving projects. International Journal of
Agile Systems and Management, 11(3):222–246.
Leal, G. D. (2019). Support à la décision pour l'analyse de l'interopérabilité des
systèmes dans un contexte d'entreprises en réseau. (Doctoral dissertation, Université
Leal, G., Guédria, W., & Panetto, H. (2019). Interoperability Assessment: A Systematic
Literature Review. Computers in Industry (In Press).
Luckham, D. C. (2011). Event processing for business: organizing the real-time enterprise.
John Wiley & Sons.
Mallek, S. (2012). Contribution au développement de l’interopérabilité en entreprise :
vers une approche anticipative de détection de problèmes d’interopérabilité dans des
Object Management Group. (2006). Méta Object Facility (MOF) 2.0 Core Specification.
Panettoa, H., Zdravkovicc, M., Jardim-Goncalvesd, R., Romeroe, D., Cecilg, J., &
Mezgárh, I. (2016). New perspective for the future interoperable enterprise systems.
Computers in Industry, s.l. : Elsevier, 79, 47-63. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2015.08.001
WSO2. (2015). The Evolution of Integration: A Comprehensive Platform for a Connected
Business. White Paper. Récupéré sur http://wso2.com/
Responsable Pédagogique Licence Coordonnateur de Projet
IUT Lumière, Université Lumière Lyon 2
+33 4 78 77 43 06