Setting up different delay for different entities entering through same delay [duplicate] - attributes

This question already has an answer here:
differen delay times for the same agent type (AnyLogic)
(1 answer)
Closed 11 months ago.
I want to set up different delay times for different entities entering in delay1.
one entry is directly from the source and another from delay2.
I understand that in "Arena" we do add attributes to the entities but here in AnyLogic, I don't know how to perform it. can anybody help me out?

The simplest option is to create a new custom agent that will be created by your source and pass through your flow diagram, with some variable that you can set to true when it is passing through the details a second time
And you just set this variable to true when it is going for rework.
And in the delay you can now access this variable and use it to set a different delay

Related

Include Relationship in Use Case Diagram [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
include or extend in UML?
(2 answers)
Closed 11 months ago.
I have this diagram. The staff receives an email when his letter is approved. Do I need add an include relationship between two use cases? If I did that, it means the staff needs to approve letter to receive an email. It's different from the description.
Definitely not. The simple reason is, that Receive Email is no use case. It is a pure function, likely used in some yet unknown use case. A use case brings added value to its actor. And receiving an email has no added value (like the dreaded Login).
It's hard to judge whether Approve Letter is a valid use case. It seems like a bit trivial. Probably if it's a certain letter in a certain process. As such, I would not let it go through as use case.
As always I recommend to read Bittner/Spence about use case modeling.

JSF Scope Selection [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How to choose the right bean scope?
(2 answers)
Closed 6 years ago.
I'm developing an application and I have a page that is divided in three pieces.
for example:
Select Files(s)
Modify Files(s)
View Results.
Requirements:
User can go back at page 1 from page 2 (this is not a big deal, redirect works too)
User can go back at page 2 from page 3 (at this point i need all the data of page 2)
User can go from page 3 to page 1 with no data. (Something like New file modification)
Currently I'm using one single .xhtml page (panel visibility change) and one #ViewScoped bean but as I add more functions in that page this is getting bigger and hard to maintain/modify. Also, i don't think that this is the best way to do it.
I start reading about #FlowScoped and #ConversationScoped but id like to hear some advices/opinions.
Thank you!
Recently, I have been in a similar situation as you. One of the lessons I took from writing a wizard-style application is that next time I would put more emphasis on immutability and immutable data structures (e.g. those that Clojure offers) so that reverting to a previous state is easy as the application grows.
Now, depending on the size of your files that is probably not feasible and might be overkill. However, remember that going back one step in a wizard needs to revert modifications being made (for example to the modifications to the files).

Rule based system initial fact processing

I have a confusion after discussion with one of my fellow on the rule base system. I have developed one in Android which has set of rules. What i say is that initial facts have to match any rule in order to start the engine, so we can directly start matching the initial facts without sending them to working memory.
the fellow says that NO, the initial facts has to enter the working memory and then matching should start and i agree till here but he also adds that you only need to get the variables from the initial facts and then match the rules for example io have a rule
a(variable),b(constant)
Initial facts in Working memory is a(VAR_VALUE)
so will it invoke the rule
a(variable),b(constant)
if the answer is yes then we can have a lot of such rules with constant values that can be invoked even when the working memory is empty.
i need some expert opinion on the issue above, so i may do the development changes as required.
Check the predicate match first, uf same then check if the subject is variable or not. If not then match with correapong rule if both subjects same then it will match.
Rules with comstants has to match elementa of wm. Otherwise it will b infinite loop. As aingle variable can come with any number of constants.
Also use better conflict reaolution strategy.

Is there a limit to how many Multiple Response Sets I can make on SPSS?

I am preparing a dataset on SPSS to analyze a survey I prepared on Limesurvey. This survey happens to have lots of multiple response set questions.
I have already done 20 multiple response sets via Analyze >>> Multiple Response >>> Define Variables. However, when I come to add more, the option to create another multiple response set is no longer present, even though I have inputted all the required info.
So, does SPSS have a limit on how many multiple response sets can be made or am I doing something wrong?
Also, what other alternatives are there?
There is no limit on the number of MR sets you can define. Be sure that you have entered all the required information in order to enable the Add button in the dialog. Note that an MR set must have at least two variables.
If you can't get the dialog to work, you can define the sets via syntax, which would be faster anyway. For example
MRSETS
/MDGROUP NAME=$health LABEL="Health status"
VARIABLES=hlth1 hlth2 hlth3 hlth4 hlth5
VALUE=1.

Different triggers for different executable tasks in the same project

Is it possible in any way to have different triggers for different executable tasks within the same project?
For example: I've got several .bat-scripts that shall be run in different intervals.
Some once every 2 hours, some once a day and some only weekly.
I haven't figured out yet if it's possible to have this in only one project since i want to avoid splitting them all up into their own projects in order to keep the CCTray clearly arranged.
Does anyone have an idea how i can achieve the described result within one project?
I managed to do it now, here is what i did:
I created several parameter triggers which all pass a different parameter and added conditions to all my tasks. Due to that i achieved what i wanted because each task only runs if the specific parameter trigger was activated and the corresponding value is set. I chose named values as parameters and compare values as condition.
No this isn't possible. The smallest triggerable component is a project.
For this you would need to break your project into smaller ones.

Resources