Check creation and maintenance for product knowledge management

• US 7,100,082 B2
• Filed: 12/13/2002
• Issued: 08/29/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 08/04/2000
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Oracle America, Inc. (Oracle Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Sun Microsystems Incorporated (Oracle Corporation)
• Inventors: Bingham, Paris E. Jr., Martin, Rex G., Treece, Alan J., Helgren, Matthew J., Little, Mike E.
• Primary Examiner(s): Baderman, Scott
• Assistant Examiner(s): SCHELL, JOSEPH O
• Application Number:
  US10/318,826
• Publication Number:
  US 20040078726A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,355 Days
• Field of Search: 714/26, 714/27, 714/35, 714/21, 706/60, 706/47, 706/48, 706/50, 706/908, 717/117, 717/121
• US Class Current: 714/26
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/2257 using expert systems
• CPC Class Codes: G06N 5/00 Computing arrangements using knowledge-based models
• CPC Class Codes: G06N 5/025 Extracting rules from data

Abstract

A system for creating and editing checks for a knowledge automation engine to use in detecting product issues on products. A knowledge automation engine may evaluate a check against a fact to detect a product issue on a product and provide a user of the product remediation information. A check may contain a product issue description, a rule to evaluate against a fact in order to detect the product issue, and remediation information to help a user address the product issue if the product issue is detected on the product. Product issues may include product installation validation and known product bugs. Facts used by the knowledge automation engine may include product configuration facts. Checks may be created and edited using a standard interface.

Claims

1. A system, comprising:

a knowledge repository configured to store product knowledge for a plurality of products, wherein the product knowledge comprises one or more checks, wherein each check comprises a rule to detect an issue for one or more products, wherein each check is assigned a plurality of state values, wherein each state value of the plurality of state values is indicative of a particular state selected from a respective set of defined states, wherein at least one set of defined states indicates whether the check is for internal use only or whether the check is available for both internal use and customer use;

a check management interface for managing checks in the knowledge repository and determining the state values assigned to the checks, wherein the check management interface is accessible over a network, and comprises;

a check creation interface for adding checks to the knowledge repository, wherein the check creation interface is configured to provide a standard interface for adding checks to the knowledge repository; and

a check maintenance interface for editing a check from the knowledge repository;

wherein the check maintenance interface is configured to provide a standard interface for editing a check from the knowledge repository.

2. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a new check is automated in the check creation interface before the new check is put into the knowledge repository.

3. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a new check is tested in the check creation interface before the new check is put into the knowledge repository.

4. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the check is removed from the knowledge repository and checked into a check maintenance interface before editing the check.

5. The system as recited in claim 4, wherein the check is tested in the check maintenance interface before the check is sent back to the knowledge repository.

6. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates a current functionality of the corresponding check.

7. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check can detect the product issue automatically.

8. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check requires human intervention to detect a product issue.

9. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check has been separated from the knowledge repository to correct an error in the check.

10. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check is in the knowledge repository and available for use by applications accessing the knowledge repository.

11. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check is being reviewed for errors.

12. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether executable code corresponding to a process identified in the corresponding check to detect a product issue is being developed.

13. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check is being tested.

14. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular state value of the plurality of state values indicates whether the corresponding check has been reviewed and tested.

15. The system as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

a fact collector configured to, in response to a query from a requester, collect one or more raw facts related to a product of the plurality of products in a first format, organize the one or more raw facts in a second format recognizable by the requester, and transmit one or more selected facts organized in the second format to the requester;

a knowledge automation engine configured to;

receive a particular check selected for transmission to the knowledge automation engine from the knowledge repository by an application executing at a product of the plurality of products;

in response to determining that a fact needed to evaluate a rule in the check is not present in a static fact repository, send a query to the fact collector to obtain the fact from the fact collector; and

evaluate the check using at least the obtained fact.

16. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein at least one check stored in the knowledge repository comprises a severity level indicator used to determine a number of test cases to be run when the check is tested.

17. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular set of defined states indicates a type of review, selected from among a specified set of types of reviews, being performed on a check.

18. The system as recited in claim 17, wherein the set of types of reviews includes a technical review, a standards review, and a review required because a check was created by a client.

19. The system as recited in claim 1, wherein a particular set of defined states indicates whether (a) a check is being reviewed to determine if it can be automated, (b) the check is awaiting automation by a check automator or (c) an automated version of the check is currently being developed.

20. A method, comprising:

creating a check for a plurality of products, wherein the check is created in a standard format and comprises a rule to detect an issue for one or more products and remediation information for the issue;

adding created checks for a product over a life cycle of the product to a knowledge repository, wherein the knowledge repository provides an interface to determine one or more state values of a plurality of state values assigned to the check, wherein each state value of the plurality of state values is indicative of a particular state selected from a respective set of defined states, wherein at least one set of defined states indicates whether the check is for internal use only or whether the check is available for both internal use and customer use;

maintaining a check over a life cycle of the product in the knowledge repository comprising;

separating the check from the knowledge repository into a maintenance environment;

editing the check in the maintenance environment; and

returning the edited check to the knowledge repository.

21. The method as recited in claim 20, wherein creating a check includes identifying a product issue and remediation information to resolve the product issue.

22. The method as recited in claim 21, wherein the rule is created using rule language to detect the identified product issue using a fact related to the product issue being detected.

23. The method as recited in claim 20, wherein the creating a check further includes automating the check by providing executable program instructions based on the rule.

24. The method as recited in claim 23, wherein the executable program instructions are specified in a knowledge predicate language format as at least one executable functional statement followed by one or more arguments.

25. The method as recited in claim 20, further comprising testing the check after creating the check or after editing the check and prior to putting the check into the knowledge repository.

26. The method as recited in claim 25, wherein the testing the check includes:

executing the check with a particular set of facts expected to result in a condition specified in a rule in the check being met; and

executing the check with another set of facts expected to result in a condition specified in a rule in the check not being met.

27. The method as recited in claim 20, further comprising storing a record of the editing of the check in a history file for the check.

28. A method, comprising:

identifying a product issue, a process for detecting the product issue on a product, and remediation information to address the product issue;

formatting a check using a standard interface to include the process for detecting the product issue on the product and the remediation information to address the product issue;

automating the process included in the check to detect a product issue;

wherein the automating the process takes place in the standard interface; and

providing an interface to determine one or more state values of a plurality of state values assigned to the check, wherein each state value of the plurality of state values is indicative of a particular state selected from a respective set of defined states, wherein at least one set of defined states indicates whether the check is for internal use only or whether the check is available for both internal use and customer use.

29. The method as recited in claim 28, further comprising testing the check after automating the check;

wherein the testing of the check takes place in the standard interface.

30. The method as recited in claim 29, further comprising adding the check to a knowledge repository after testing the check.

31. The method as recited in claim 28, further comprising reviewing the check for technical errors.

32. The method as recited in claim 28, further comprising:

putting a manual version of the check in a knowledge repository prior to automating the check; and

after the check has been automated, in response to determining that the code or output of the automated version of the check has an issue, using the manual version of the check to identify product issues corresponding to the check.

33. A method, comprising:

providing an interface to determine one or more state values of a plurality of state values assigned to a check in a knowledge repository, wherein each state value of the plurality of state values is indicative of a particular state selected from a respective set of defined states, wherein at least one set of defined states indicates whether the check is for internal use only or whether the check is available for both internal use and customer use;

separating the check from the knowledge repository to conduct maintenance on the check;

updating the check in the maintenance environment and updating a particular state value of the plurality of state values assigned to the check to indicate that the check is being updated;

testing the updated check in the maintenance environment; and

putting the updated check into a knowledge repository and updating another state value of the plurality of state values assigned to the check to indicate that the check is available for evaluation.

34. The method as recited in claim 33, further comprising reviewing the check for technical errors.

35. The method as recited in claim 33, further comprising automating the updated check prior to putting the updated check into the knowledge repository.

36. A tangible, computer-readable storage medium comprising program instructions, wherein the program instructions are computer-executable to implement:

creating a check for a plurality of products, wherein the check is created in a standard format and comprises a rule to detect an issue for one or more products and remediation information for the issue;

adding created checks for a product over a life cycle of the product to a knowledge repository, wherein the knowledge repository provides an interface to determine one or more state values of a plurality of state values assigned to the check, wherein each state value of the plurality of state values is indicative of a particular state selected from a respective set of defined states, wherein at least one set of defined states indicates whether the check is for internal use only or whether the check is available for both internal use and customer use;

maintaining a check over a life cycle of the product in the knowledge repository comprising;

separating the check from the knowledge repository into a maintenance environment;

editing the check in the maintenance environment; and

returning the edited check to the knowledge repository.

37. The computer-readable storage medium as recited in claim 36, wherein the creating a check further includes automating the check by providing executable program instructions based on the rule.

38. The computer-readable storage medium as recited in claim 37, wherein the executable program instructions are specified in a knowledge predicate language format as at least one executable functional statement followed by one or more arguments.