PROMISE PEID Grouping

Five PEID groups have been defined, which include all PEID types which can be found in the PROMISE demonstrators, and will be just as applicable to other future application scenarios. The evolution of these groups is described below. The five groups are defined as follows:

Type 0 PEID: Identifier-only PEID. The PEID contains only a GUPI (Globally Unique Product ID) that is usually of the write-once-read-many (WORM) type. Examples include barcode, RFID tag or any information device for which only the GUPI is accessible, no matter how “computationally powerful” the PEID is.

Type 1 PEID: Only identifier and data storage capabilities, no computation capabilities. Data storage may also be re-writable. Examples: barcode and passive RFID tag with data contents in addition to GUPI. Intermittent network connectivity through proxy device (e.g. barcode reader, RFID tag-reader)

Type 2 PEID: Limited computation power; possibly including sensors and other “measuring” capabilities. Wireless network connectivity when “in range”. Examples: active RFID, WiFi-enabled devices etc.

Type 3 PEID: Medium-level computation power, sensor connectivity, data processing power. Wireless network connectivity when “in range”. Example: vehicle ECUs, embedded controllers in general. UPnP is a good option for these, but for some it might be simpler to embed the PROMISE Data Services (middleware) connectivity.

Type 4 PEID: PEIDs with "sufficient" computation power e.g. for implementing "client" connectivity to PROMISE Data Services (middleware) Web Services or even implementing the full service. The Type 4 PEID applies typically where the product has an on-board computer of sufficient power and functionality to support an Internet network connection, which may be either a persistent or an on-demand connection, and the flexibility to imbed the necessary PROMISE Data Services (middleware) support.

Evolution

Initially the PROMISE project examined the concept of grouping PEIDs according to lifecycle phase, BOL, MOL and EOL. Thus it was thought it might be practical to design a generic PEID that would be suitable for a wide range of applications in BOL for example.
The PROMISE demonstrator scenarios and their PEID systems all included various links to BOL, MOL and EOL, even though any one of them was focused on one specific phase. This was due to the fact that each of the scenarios has a complete life cycle history, even though some of the stages (BOL, MOL, and EOL) exist only for a short while.
Furthermore individual components of a product can have their own life cycle (e.g. spare parts belonging to a vehicle with their own life cycle history which differs from the life cycle history of the complete vehicle). In addition to this each scenario (or component parts belonging to the scenario) contain different PEID types with a different level of functionality.
PEIDs generally remain with a product or component for its entire life, and are not exchanged when the product moves from one life cycle phase to another. This led to the conclusion that an alternative grouping for the PEID systems would be necessary.
Additional analysis showed that the original eleven PROMISE demonstrators could be grouped according to application areas as shown in the following list:
  • Vehicle applications (5)
  • Household applications (2)
  • Industrial applications (4)
This grouping could in the longer term represent an option for customized PROMISE PEID systems that are specifically designed for generic application areas.
In the end a revised grouping was adopted which used computation and network availability of PEIDs as the main criteria for the different groups. These were found to be the characteristics that remain constant for the entire life-time of the PEID, making it independent of lifecycle phase. The rationale for this new grouping resulted from analysis of the PROMISE demonstrator application scenarios, but this grouping is generally applicable to a wider set of scenarios.