Abstract:
Currently lacking are effective and accurate tools to help petroleum traders and logistics personnel to make better decisions, collaborate in real-time and negotiate deals in a private and secure environment. The present invention addresses this and other needs in the industry. 
     In particular, the present invention provides a non-client computer resident method optimizes vessel scheduling by aggregating vessel information. At least some of the vessel information is automatically downloaded from an electronic source. The aggregated vessel information is stored in a vessel information database comprising vessel information database records. Information is obtained about a potential vessel contracting transaction. The vessel information database is searched in a real-time manner to match the potential vessel contracting transaction to at least one of the vessel information database records such that the vessel contracting transaction is optimized. At least one of the optimized vessel contracting transactions is then reported. Optimization factors used to produce the optimized vessel contracting transactions include lowest cost and fastest delivery.

Description:
RELATED APPLICATION 
   This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/230,840 filed on Sep. 7, 2000, the entire teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference. 
   This application is related to United States Patent Application titled: COMPUTER METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PETROLEUM TRADING AND LOGISTICS by Girish Navani, James Harrison Stommel, Barry H. Cohn, Michael P. Evans, Donald A. Dietrich, Bruce A. Logan, Michael D. Allen, Charles C. Moore, Linus Hakimattar, Stephen J. Doyle, Wayne C. Bartel, Scott Folger, Nigel Johnson, Nigel Kidd, Khaled Zayadine, Vip Patel, Ken Rosen, Sean Collins and Vlad Mahalec and United States Patent Application titled: COMPUTER SYSTEM FOR PROVIDING A COLLABORATIVE WORKFLOW ENVIRONMENT by Girish Navani, Michael P. Evans, Donald A. Dietrich, Michael D. Allen, Charles C. Moore, Linus Hakimattar, Stephen J. Doyle, Wayne C. Bartel, Kevin Maher, Vip Patel, Ken Rosen and Vlad Mahalec all related applications filed on even date herewith and commonly owned by the owner of this application. 

   BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
   Generally speaking, the petroleum industry involves three major players—(1) oil refineries, (2) crude oil and refined products traders/brokers and (3) service providers such as vessel owners/brokers, inspectors, terminal operators and pipeline companies. Each party typically uses internal procedures and proprietary means to conduct business/trading. Crude oil and petroleum product trading is not standardized, there are over 600 types of crude oil around the world. 
   Briefly, the oil refineries receive crude oil and process the oil into usable products and/or blendable components such as fuel oil, intermediate feedstocks and high grade gasoline. The refinery receives orders for various quantities of products specified by respective grade and quality. Also, the refinery schedules specific dates by which to fulfill the orders. 
   An analyst of the refinery uses internal and/or published standards to determine the necessary ingredients and quantities thereof to blend together to form an ordered product to specification. Next, he checks the refinery&#39;s inventory for availability of these ingredients in the desired quantities. He may find some ingredients, at the desired quantities, to be in inventory while other ingredients need to be obtained. The analyst cross references the ingredients of his order with that of other orders to account for any inventory which may be in common with the order he is processing. Thus it is a complex exercise to determine which ingredients and at what quantities are needed to be added to the inventory in order to fulfill each product order. 
   Further, a product marketer forecasts demand of products. A refinery planner evaluates refinery operation, output and available resources, and monitors/maintains appropriate inventory. Inventory may include (i) various crude oils, (ii) intermediate feedstocks usable for component blending and (iii) end products. The refinery planner wants to optimize the plant (refinery) and thus needs to determine what crude oils are going to give the best yield given the current plant configuration (distillation columns, catalyst crackers, etc.). 
   The supply trader or an outside broker has the task of obtaining the needed feedstock at the necessary quantities for inventory. For each needed feedstock, the supply trader has a target receipt date and a total dollar budget which is acceptable to the refinery (in order to economically and timely fill product orders). The supply trader contacts his network of suppliers for respective quotes (going rates) on available quantities of the needed feedstock. Typically, rates change daily or within a day. Sometimes the supply trader will look to purchasing piecewise quantities from plural suppliers which in the aggregate meets the total needed amount of a feedstock within the acceptable budget. Variation in quality, and the like, affect the quantities and the price that the trader will pay for a given feedstock. Also the trader needs to work with scheduling personnel to arrange for shipping of the quantities of the feedstock, from the various sources, so that the total needed amount arrives at the refinery by an acceptable date (the target receipt date). 
   As can be seen given the foregoing, the trader must make multiple phone calls to his suppliers and shippers and maintain a complex tally of costs, quantities and time schedules in order to accomplish his task. That is, by the time the trader makes a series of phone calls, e.g. to a first supplier, a second supplier, a shipper and then re-calls the first supplier, the unit price may have changed or the shipping vessel is no longer available. Consequently the trader must make adjustments, more phone calls and recalculate totals to ensure he is within budget/target (dollar and timewise). 
   Further there is a dynamic aspect of crude oil and petroleum product trading. In transit amounts of crude oil (or intermediate feedstock/components) may become available to the market where that amount is arriving too late to fulfill an original order. Various amounts of crude oil, intermediate feedstocks (components) or end products may become available in a disaster recovery situation. Traders/brokers use these offers and the results thereof in fulfilling (in full or part) original orders. 
   Further, there are various distribution points for petroleum products (e.g., gasoline) throughout the United States. Different distribution points carry different grades of products as a function of local and state regulations. The U.S. Department of Energy controls amounts in inventory at each of the distribution points. The federal agency determines what amounts of which products need to be shifted among the distribution points based on monthly to quarterly reports by the distribution points. Accordingly, the petroleum industry supply chain is illustrated in  FIG. 5  and discussed later. 
   SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
   Currently lacking are automated means for effecting real-time crude oil and petroleum product trading, refining and logistics support. The present invention addresses this and other needs in the industry. 
   In particular, the present invention provides a non-client computer resident method for optimizing vessel scheduling by aggregating vessel information. At least some of the vessel information is automatically downloaded from an electronic source. The aggregated vessel information is stored in a vessel information database comprising vessel information database records. Information is obtained about a potential vessel contracting transaction. The vessel information database is searched in a real-time manner to match the potential vessel contracting transaction to at least one of the vessel information database records such that the vessel contracting transaction is optimized. At least one of the optimized vessel contracting transactions is then reported. Optimization factors used to produce the optimized vessel contracting transactions include lowest cost and fastest delivery. 
   The vessel information comprises at least one of: vessel availability, physical vessel specifications, standard port-to-port pricing, physical port specifications and vessel vetting information. 
   In one preferred embodiment, optimized vessel scheduling is provided as part of an overall transportation search and optimization system. 
   Benefits of the present invention include more accurate data and fewer typographical errors. Efficiency is improved as lag-time is squeezed out of supply chain operations. The graphical user interface is easier to use than conventional methods of vessel scheduling and consolidates the interface to aggregated vessel data. Real-time access to server-based vessel scheduling applications provides optimized results faster. 

   
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following more particular description of preferred embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention. 
       FIG. 1  is a schematic overview of a computer network in which the present invention is operated. 
       FIG. 2  is a block diagram of the preferred embodiment of the invention. 
       FIG. 3   a  is an illustration of a deal negotiation system main screen of the present invention in the embodiment of  FIG. 2 . 
       FIGS. 3   b  and  3   c  are illustrations of working screen views of respective operations in the deal negotiation system main screen of  FIG. 3   a.    
       FIGS. 4   a  and  4   b  are schematic diagrams of trade deal objects and supporting tables employed in the embodiment of  FIG. 2 . 
       FIG. 4   c  is a flow diagram of the operations and screen views of  FIGS. 3   a – 3   c  based on the data structures of  FIGS. 4   a  and  4   b.    
       FIG. 5  is a schematic view of the supply chain and related roles in the petroleum industry. 
       FIG. 6   a  is a block diagram of an arbitrage analyzer configured according to an embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 6   b  illustrates a graphical user interface for defining and viewing an arbitrage relationship configured according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 6   c  illustrates a petroleum trading, refining and logistics aware search engine configured according an embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 7  is a flow diagram of an online analysis program supporting decision support tools of the preferred embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 8  is a diagram of the hierarchical structure of the collaborative workflow environment configured according an embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 9  illustrates the various participants involved in a refinery upset collaborative workflow process configured according an embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 10  illustrates the various participants involved in a closed deal tracking collaborative workflow process configured according an embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 11   a  illustrates a collaborative workflow environment view of collaborative workflow processes. 
       FIG. 11   b  illustrates a view of business processes associated with a specific collaborative workflow process. 
       FIG. 11   c  illustrates a view of an activity associated with a specific business process. 
       FIG. 12  is an illustration of a graphical user interface for vessel searching and optimization configured according to an embodiment of the present invention. 
       FIG. 13   a  illustrates the CBAT-G tool being used to evaluate components for blending. 
       FIG. 13   b  illustrates the CBAT-G tool being used to integrate to decision support tools providing vessel scheduling and optimization services for components and blends. 
   

   DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
   Illustrated in  FIG. 1  is a plurality of networks  19   a ,  19   b ,  19   c . Each network  19  includes a multiplicity of digital processors  11 ,  13 ,  15 ,  17  (e.g., PC&#39;s, mini computer and the like) loosely coupled to a host processor or server  21   a ,  21   b ,  21   c  for communication among the processors within that network  19 . Also included in each network  19  are printers, facsimiles and the like. In turn, each host processor  21  is coupled to a communication line  23  which interconnects or links the networks  19   a ,  19   b ,  19   c  to each other to form an internet. That is, each of the networks  19  are themselves loosely coupled along a communication line  23  to enable access from a digital processor  11 ,  13 ,  15 ,  17  of one network  19  to a digital processor  11 ,  13 ,  15 ,  17  of another network  19 . In the preferred embodiment, the loose coupling of networks  19  is a global computer network, such as the Internet. 
   Also linked to communication line  23  are various servers  25   a ,  25   b  which provide to end users access to the Internet (i.e., access to potentially all other networks  19 , and hence processors  11 ,  13 ,  15 ,  17  connected to the Internet). The present invention is a software program  31  operated and connected through a server  27  to the Internet for communication among the various networks  19  and/or processors  11 ,  13 ,  15 ,  17  and other end user connected through respective servers  25 . In the preferred embodiment, the server  27  is, for example, Sun Microsystems UltraSparc (e.g., Enterprise series), or a multiplicity of similar such servers running HyperText Transfer protocol (HTTP) server software to support operation of present invention program  31 . 
   Upon an end user logging onto program  31  through a common Internet protocol, program  31  generates an initial screen view and displays the same to the end user. Depending on the unique user ID that the end user enters during user logon, a different initial screen, view and subsequent series of screens, per user, are displayed. The unique user ID is preferably assigned to the user during a registration process prior to use of the program  31 . Through the registration process the type of user (plant manager, analyst, oil trading broker, . . . etc.), security level or access (read, write, modify) privileges and other determinations about the user are made. Based on these determinations, the features and tools of program  31  most usable and pertinent to the particular user are tagged/flagged and linked to the user&#39;s unique user ID. Upon a login bearing the unique user ID, the program  31  formulates an appropriate initial screen view for the corresponding user. The preferred embodiment is a role-based system defined by user type. 
   Referring to  FIG. 2 , a table, set of pointers, or other means  35  are employed to cross reference unique user ID to user type, security/access level, and/or features and tools of program  31 . Various data structures and constructs are suitable and are in the purview of one skilled in the art. In the preferred embodiment, user type (in user ID table  35 ) is defined in a role-based definitions table  38 . Definitions table  38  is indexed by user type, and for each user type, definitions table  38  specifies a corresponding business or industry role and respective tasks of that role. Thus, for example, a user type “B” may be defined in table  38  to correspond to the role of “Broker”, and definitions table  38  specifies the corresponding tasks of creating deals, negotiating deals, closing deals, etc., for that user type and role. 
   The possible tools, links, subsequent screens and other information that an initial screen view may have are discussed next. It is understood that various combinations of the following are employed for various end users depending on the use determinations made at the registration stage and tied (through tables  35  and  38 ) to the unique user ID per user. 
   Continuing with  FIG. 2 , program  31  is formed of an assembly of user-interactive applications programs  37  (namely, the deal negotiation system  37   a , the scheduling application  37   b  and collaborative workflow application  37   c ), corresponding screen views  33  and user interface. As mentioned above, depending on user ID (and hence user types), the different application programs  37  provide different support tools  39  and screen views  33  for use by the end user during execution of the respective application program  37 . 
   For example, the deal negotiation system  37   a  provides a main screen view  41  as illustrated in  FIG. 3   a . The deal negotiation system main screen  41  enables end users to create, view, discuss, negotiate and close a trade (i.e., define and complete a transaction) for a desired quantity and grade of crude oil, intermediate feedstock or petroleum product. To that end, the deal negotiation system main screen  41  and series of subscreens (from tabs) and windows (from drop down, pop-up or cascading menus) provide an online trading process that allows end users to buy or sell crude oil and petroleum products online and to handle other necessary operations related to petroleum trading. As such, the deal negotiation application  37   a  allows end users to conduct trading in a private and/or public marketplace in a secure-data, real-time environment. 
   In the preferred embodiment, the deal negotiation system main screen  41  displays information about bids and offers (of an end user) according to markets in which they are currently posted. That is, the “U.S. Crudes” tab (subscreen view)  43   a  displays the end user&#39;s current trade deals involving U.S. crude oil. The “International Crudes” tab (subscreen view)  43   b  displays the end user&#39;s current trade deals involving international crude oil. The “U.S. Products” tab (subscreen view)  43   c  displays the end user&#39;s current U.S. petroleum products trade deals. The “International Products” tab (subscreen view)  43   d  displays the end user&#39;s current international petroleum product trade deals. The “Intermediates” tab (subscreen view)  43   e  displays the end user&#39;s current intermediates feedstock trade deals. The “What&#39;s New” tab (subscreen view)  43   f  displays trades on which the end user has not yet acted. 
   For each posted trade deal  45  of a given tab  43  (subscreen view), the deal negotiation application  37   a  displays: 
   (i) Name (abbreviated or the like) of the counter party making or receiving a bid or offer, 
   (ii) type of trade (e.g., basis trade, index trade, fixed and flat trade or buy and sell trade), 
   (iii) grade of petroleum being traded, 
   (iv) geographic location where the crude oil, intermediate feedstock or petroleum product is being loaded or delivered, 
   (v) delivery terms and time period/date range (e.g., free on board (FOB); cost, insurance and freight (CIF); cost and freight (C&amp;F); delivered (DLVD); delivered exship (DES); delivered duty paid (DDP); delivered duty unpaid (DDU)), 
   (vi) pricing basis used to determine final price of the closed deal, and 
   (vii) bid or offer information  55 . (to be associated to the pricing basis (above) 
   Bid and offer information  55  includes: 
   (i) status of a bid/offer (e.g., new/not yet acted on by recipient, active trade/can be negotiated and closed, inactive trade/closed by other trading party, expired trade/no longer available for negotiating, on hold/temporarily unavailable for negotiating or acceptance). Symbols, icons or other indicators may be employed to indicate each different status; 
   (ii) quantity being traded; 
   (iii) quantity unit of measure for the posted material; and 
   (iv) bid/offer amount that is over or under market or index price. A bid or offer amount may alternatively be indicated as a flat amount instead of as a differential. 
   For filtered views of the foregoing trade data, the deal negotiation system  37   a  provides Tips check box  47 , first view list  49 , second view list  51  and grades  53  features. Tip check box  47  enables the “mouse-over display of bid and offer information  55  in expanded or spelled-out fashion instead of abbreviations and symbols, when the cursor is moved across (hovers over) the posted trades (deals)  45 . The first view list  49  controls the types of trade deals displayed. In the preferred embodiment, the types of trade deals that can be selected are: public, private and all active. The second view list  51  further filters the types of trade deals of the first view list  49  between all and self-posted trades  45 . The grades feature  53  controls display of posted trades  45  based on user-selected grade of petroleum. 
   The deal negotiation system  37   a  also provides various operations on trades (deals)  45 , individually or as a group (e.g., in a common market, tab/subscreen  43 ). The operations are implemented through pop up menus, pull down menus, icons, buttons or other working areas in the screen views. In the preferred embodiment, the operations include “view”, “create”, “hold”, “resume”, “cancel”, “negotiate”, “delivery term details” and “add to decision support tools”, each described next. 
   The “view” operation  40  ( FIG. 3   a ) displays details of a user-selected offer or bid of a posted trade (deal)  45  displayed in the deal negotiation system main screen  41  or subscreens  43 . The displayed detailed information about the selected trade includes the trade type, the trade commodity details, market and pricing details, quantity and trader information. 
   The “create” operation  42  displays a working area in which to add a trade deal  45 , i.e. allows the end user to create an offer or bid in a desired marketplace. Inviting selected individuals from a deal negotiation system suppliers address book and/or private address book and buddy list. Creating an offer is a seller&#39;s function that allows the seller to place the commodity on the deal negotiation system main screen  41  to one or more invited parties with the same price or separate privately offered quantity selling prices. Likewise, creating a bid is a buyer&#39;s function which enables the buyer to buy a commodity that may be available in the market to one or more invited parties.  FIG. 3   b  is illustrative of the working area  57  supporting the “create” operation  42 . 
   Preferably in the working area  57  to add a trade deal, the end user indicates either offer or bid and either public or private to define the nature of the new trade. A public trade deal is posted to all trader end users that log into, and are authorized to access, the Web server  27  running invention program  31 . In that case, a seller may obtain bids from all end users who are interested in bidding for the posted offer. A private trade deal is posted to a selected list of the server  27  end users (as further described below). 
   The working area  57  to add a trade deal  45  provides a field for the end user creating the trade (and hence the “originating user” ) to specify a campaign name or identifier for the new trade or group of trades. Next the originating user specifies a grade and geographic region (market) for the commodity being traded. In the preferred embodiment the market options are U.S. crudes, international crudes, U.S. products, international products and U.S. intermediates these categories have become more granular, for example US products has been divided into US gasoline and US distillate. The same will hold true for International Products. The originating user may select different predefined grades from these markets along with an optional default delivery location. In response the deal negotiation system  37   a  populates the market region and grade fields with appropriate standard specifications and populates the delivery location field. Alternatively, the originating end user may type in a grade and corresponding specifications overriding the predefined standard specifications. Predefined templates of frequently executed trades will facilitate the way trades are posted and negotiated. 
   Next in  FIG. 3   b , the originating user specifies delivery type, such as one of the standard delivery options of FOB, CIF, DLVD, etc. The end user also specifies the deal type such as a basis trade, fixed trade or index trade. The end/originating user defines delivery dates by indicating a start time and an end time of availability of the commodity being traded. Depending on the deal type, the delivery type information may vary. That is, if a basis deal type is specified, the end user may select an exchange and the contract month. If the index deal type is specified, the end user may select a pricing index and enter the pricing commodity in the working area  57 . If a fixed deal type is specified, then no further options are available for delivery. If a buy/sell option is specified, then the end user may further specify commodity trade details. 
   Next in  FIG. 3   b  the end (originating) user enters quantity and pricing information for the new trade deal. Included in the quantity is the unit of measurement. The pricing information includes the pricing basis and either the flat price or price differential above or below the Exchange (index) price. The pricing basis indicates how the published prices of an Exchange will be used to determine the pricing of the new trade. The pricing basis and pricing window may be, for example, price established by a settlement committee, the published Exchange price three days around the bill of lading, the published Exchange price of a designated month, the scheduled monthly average, and the like. An expiration hour or period of time may also be specified by the end/originating user. The system will keep count down and expire trades that are set to expire. The originating user may specify a different quantity, price and/or expiration time per trader to whom the subject new trade deal is posted. 
   Finally in  FIG. 3   b , the originating user selects or otherwise specifies traders to whom the new trade deal is to be posted. This may be accomplished through a selection off of a drop down list of registered end users of program  31  or a private list of the originating user selected traders. At the end of entering the foregoing information in the working area  57  to add a trade deal  45 , the originating user completes the create operation  42  by signaling deal negotiation application  37   a  to post the new trade  45  on the deal negotiation system main screen view  41 , either in the private or public sector accordingly. This selection process comprises the following sequence of events:
     1. define the market and terms.   2. invite counter parties   3. set price/quantity/expiration   4. post trade(s)
 
After a trade is posted on the deal negotiation system invitations are sent to counter parties via e-mail, pagers, and other electronic devices.
 
Inviting Unlicensed PetroVantage Users to Trade
   

   The system allows for a licensed PetroVantage User to “invite” and unlicensed PetroVantage User to a “Private” offering. The steps included are:
     1. Licensed Trader sets up an Unlicensed Party in their PetroVantage Private Address Book, simultaneously creating limited access to their transactions posted to the PetroVantage deal negotiation system.   2. The Unlicensed Party becomes available to the licensed party only in the selection list in the Add A Trade application.   3. The licensed party may then select the unlicensed party to be included in a Private posting.   4. The Unlicensed Party receives an invitation to Trade via e-mail which includes a URL directing the unlicensed User to their private posting on the PetroVantage Deal negotiation system.   5. The Unlicensed User gains limited access to the PetroVantage System and only their Private postings. The Unlicensed User may then negotiate and close the deal with the licensed User.   6. The Unlicensed Users access expires over a time period with no activity   

   Referring back to  FIG. 3   a , the “hold” operation  44  may be effected to one posted trade deal  45  or all posted trade deals  45  displayed and originally posted by the user in the deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43 . An end user may hold only a trade deal  45  that he has posted and not trades posted by another trader user. The hold operation  44  changes the status indication (in bid/offer information  55 ,  FIG. 3   a ) and prevents counterparties from closing the trade deal  45 . The respective end user must resume a trade deal  45  before another trader may accept the trade deal  45 . 
   The “resume” operation  46  enables an end user to resume one or all trades  45  that the end user has on hold. Resuming a trade deal  45  through the resume operation  46  changes the status indication to active (in bid/offer information  55 ,  FIG. 3   a ) and allows other traders to close or otherwise act on the re-posted trade  45 . 
   The “cancel” operation  48  ( FIG. 3   a ) enables an end user to cancel one or all trade deals  45  that he has originated and posted to the deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43 . Canceling a trade deal  45  permanently removes the trade deal  45  from the deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43 . A canceled trade deal cannot be resumed. Only the originating user (original creator of the trade) may cancel a trade deal  45 , to remove it from the deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43  of all end users. 
   Continuing with  FIG. 3   a , the “negotiate” operation  50  affects the posted trade deal  45  selected by the end user. The negotiate operation  50  enables the end user to conduct trade  45  negotiations using a secure instant messaging. That is, the path toward closing a trade  45  requires a back and forth dialog between trading partners. Traditionally the trade negotiation involves discussions on issues such as the material quality and quantity, the delivery terms, the expected arrival and departure times, the parcel details, etc. 
   Thus in the present invention  31 , negotiating involves private message exchanges between two parties. The messages provide requested information and allow an end user and trading partners to exchange trading details in real time. In the preferred embodiment, the negotiate operation  50  provides a working negotiation window  59  as shown in  FIG. 3   c . The working negotiation window  59  displays summary information about the respective trade deal  45  (i.e., deal identification name or number, trade status, deal type of the trade, grade, delivery location and starting date of the delivery and the trade market—U.S. vs. international crudes vs. products). 
   The working negotiation window  59  also displays buyer information or seller information as appropriate. The buyer information includes buyer name, commodity description/petroleum grade, pricing basis including exchange and month that the exchange price was published, the buyer&#39;s bid or offer amount equal to, above or below the exchange price, quantity the buyer wishes to bid on, pricing window for the bid, time that the bid will remain active/expiration date time. The seller&#39;s information includes seller&#39;s name, commodity description/petroleum grade, pricing basis, the seller&#39;s offered amount that is equal to, above or below the exchange price, quantity that the seller wishes to sell, pricing window for this offer, the amount of time that the offer will remain active, messages received from trading partners and a text field for entering an instant message to a trading partner. 
   Additional features of working negotiation window  59  include an automated warning, or trigger alert, to indicate when other end users are attempting to negotiate. Another feature enables the end user to invite additional traders to the current posted trade  45 . 
   Returning to  FIG. 3   a , the “delivery term details” operation  52  enables an end user to view and modify the delivery terms of a posted trade  45  created by that end user. In the preferred embodiment, the delivery terms may be made flexible by applying a tolerance to the subject commodity&#39;s volume. To that end, the end user specifies a percentage of the total volume or an absolute minimum and maximum limit on the commodity&#39;s quantity through the delivery term details operation  52 . 
   The “add to decision support tools” operation  54  ( FIG. 3   a ) enables an end user to download trade deal information of a selected posted trade  45  to a selected support tool  39 . That is, trade information of a desired posted trade  45  may be shared across various working screens  33  and support tools  39  of invention program  31  without requiring the end user to re-enter and retype the information at each use of a feature or tool. The support tools  39  in the preferred embodiment are discussed later. 
   To accomplish the foregoing operations  40 ,  42 ,  44 ,  46 ,  48 ,  50 ,  52 ,  54  and to display the functioning thereof, in deal negotiation system main screen view and subscreens  41 ,  43 , the preferred embodiment employs the data structures (e.g., tables and objects) illustrated in  FIGS. 4   a  and  4   b . In particular there is a respective trade object  67  ( FIG. 4   a ) for each trade deal  45  posted on trade screens  41 ,  43 . 
   Turning to  FIG. 4   a , trade object  67  stores the following data regarding a respective trade deal  45 . Trade object  67  stores and may be indexed by originating user ID (i.e., the user ID of the end user who originally created the subject trade deal  45 ). The full spelling of the originating user&#39;s name is linked from table  35  to object  67 . Trade object  67  stores an indication of status for bid and offer information  55  in deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43 . Per end user, trade object  67  stores a substatus indication of “cancel” where the given end user has applied the cancel operation  48  to the subject trade deal  45 . 
   Trade object  67  stores indications of whether the subject trade deal  45  is a bid or offer and a public or private trade. In the case of a private trade, the object  67  also indicates the originating user-specified invitees (recipients of the trade). 
   A deal ID  79  and originating end-user specified campaign name uniquely identifies the trade object  67 . Consequently deal ID  79  is used as an index or key to object  67 . 
   The trade object  67  stores deal specifications such as general market categories (i.e., U.S. crude oil, international crude oil, U.S. intermediate feedstocks and U.S. products), grade of commodity being traded, quantity, units of measure for the quantity and expiration of trade bid/offer. Trade object  67  also stores defining attributes such as delivery/load location and dates, delivery type, deal type and pricing (including index or basis, and differential relative to index/basis). Per trader, trade object  67  may indicate different deal types, pricing, quantity and expiration of the subject trade deal  45  as illustrated by the asterisks in  FIG. 4   a.    
   A log  71  of instant messages and the like from negotiations in the subject trade deal  45  is stored and linked to object  67  at  69 . User ID of the traders involved in the negotiations/ messages are linked to the log  71  from the object&#39;s  67  list of invitees at  73 . Access to view and/or update is determined to be “private” based on the following rules: 
   A trader posting a bid or offer may view and update all active transactions posted by that trader. 
   A trader receiving a private bid or offer may view and post counter bids/offers only against the private bid/offer made to that trader 
   Similarly, counter offers made in this trade deal  45  are logged at  75 . Details of each counter offer are stored in a respective trade object  67   n . Pointers or other link mechanisms are used from counter offers in log  75  to respective trade objects  67   n.    
   Once the subject deal is closed, the trade details at closing are indicated (directly or indirectly) at  77  and appropriately linked to trade object  67 . Confirmation to both the buyer and seller is generated and sent via e-mail. Using the unique ID of trade object  67  (i.e., deal ID  79 ), the closing trade details  77  are shared with collaborative workflow applications  37   c  ( FIG. 2 ), scheduling application  37   b  ( FIG. 2 ), back office applications and so forth. 
   One part of the closing details  77  is vessel or transportation information for shipping the subject commodity from seller to buyer.  FIG. 4   b  illustrates the data tables storing the supporting vessel information. For each vessel in deal negotiation application  37   a , vessel table  81  indicates a unique vessel identifier, class  85  of the subject vessel, waterway restrictions  91 , schedule of the subject vessel (including in-use periods indexed by deal ID  79  of closed deals  45  from deal negotiation system screens  41 ,  43 ) and cost rate. Also vessel table  81  indicates the last cargo carried by the subject vessel and whether the vessel is cleaned after that load. A history data portion in vessel table  81  indicates name of vessel, owner&#39;s name and captain&#39;s name. The historical data is optionally hidden from display to end-user traders to keep the subject vessel anonymous for scheduling purposes. 
   Class  85  of a vessel is defined by supporting class definitions table  83 . For each class  85 , class table  83  indicates load capacity, vessel dimensions, hull structure (e.g., double hulled, . . . ) travel rate and load rate. According to the indicated vessel dimensions and hull structure, vessels of the subject class are allowed or limited access to certain waterways and ports. The class definition table  83  together with a port table  87  and processing rules  89  are used to determine specific waterway restrictions per vessel in vessel table  81 . 
   Port table  87  specifies each port by location, harbor depth, pipe availability and other accommodations. Local and federal government rules governing waterway restrictions are specified in processing rules  89  for rules-based generation of restrictions  91 . Processing rules  89  are applied to a given class  85  (from class definition table  83 ) across all ports in port table  87  and produce the list of waterways/ports from which the given class  85  of vessels is restricted. The resulting list is indicated at  91  for vessels of the given class  85 . 
   Turning now to  FIG. 4   c , the operations  40 ,  42 ,  44 ,  46 ,  48 ,  50 ,  52 ,  54  and working views of the deal negotiation system  37   a  are supported by trade objects  67  ( FIG. 4   a ) as follows. In step  95 , per end user login, deal negotiation application  37   a  gathers trade objects  67  with the corresponding user ID in the object originating user ID field or invitee field. The deal negotiation system  37   a  uses the data from the gathered trade objects  67  to form the deal negotiation system screens  41 ,  43 . In particular, deal negotiation application  37   a  displays the trade deals  45  corresponding to the gathered trade objects  67  and omits from view, the trade deals  45  corresponding to gathered trade objects  67  with substatus equal to “cancel” (from a cancel operation  48 ). Further deal negotiation application  37   a  arranges the subject trade deals  45  according to market indicated in the corresponding trade objects  67  attribute (US/International Crude oil, U.S. Intermediate feedstocks and U.S. products,  FIG. 4   a ). 
   In step  96 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  responds to the end user setting first view list  49  in  FIG. 3   a . In response, deal negotiation application  37   a  filters the displayed trade deals  45  based on public or private indication in corresponding trade objects  67  or on object status being set to “active” accordingly. In response to the end user setting the second view list  51  ( FIG. 3   a ), the deal negotiation application  37   a  further filters the displayed trade deals  45  based on the originating user attribute of the trade objects  67  being set to the end user ID of the current user. Also in step  96 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  filters the displayed trade deals  45  based on grade attribute of the corresponding trade objects  67  in response to the grade feature  53  ( FIG. 3   a ). 
   In step  97 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the Tips check box  47  of  FIG. 3   a . If box  47  is set, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  links to user data table  35  ( FIG. 2 ) and supporting standards lists (or other wise obtains the data contained therein) to display full spellings instead of abbreviations or symbols in screen views  41 ,  43 . Full spellings of users/traders names, status indications, delivery type, deal type and pricing are available from respective lists as illustrated in  FIG. 4   a.    
   In step  98 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  responds to operations  40 ,  42 ,  44 ,  46 ,  48 ,  50 ,  52 ,  54  ( FIG. 3   a ). In response to end user activation of the “view” operation  40  on a displayed trade deal  45 , deal negotiation application  37   a  checks the status and expiration attributes of the corresponding trade object  67 . As appropriate, the deal negotiation system  37   a  then composes a window view with trade type, commodity details, market and pricing details, quantity and trader information, each from respective attributes of the corresponding trade object  67 . 
   In response to end user activation of the “create” operation  42  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  displays the working screen  57  ( FIG. 3   b ) to add a trade and prompts the end user to enter trade details. The deal negotiation system  37   a  displays the predefined values/options for certain fields in response to end user request. The deal negotiation system  37   a  at step  42  ( FIG. 4   c ) also populates the delivery/load location, deal type and delivery type fields of the displayed working screen  57 , with respective data from the user data table  35  and standards lists. Lastly, the deal negotiation system  37   a  instantiates a trade object  67  with attributes set according to the values that the end user has entered into the displayed working screen  57 . The new trade object  67  corresponds to the new trade deal  45  created by the end user, and steps  95  and  96  use new trade object  67  to refresh the deal negotiation system views  41 ,  43  to now include the newly created trade deal  45  corresponding to new trade object  67 . 
   In response to end user activation of the “hold” operation  44  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the originating user attribute of the corresponding trade object  67 . If the attribute is set to the user ID of the current end user, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  changes trade object  67  status to hold. In turn, the corresponding trade deal  45  status (as displayed at bid/offer information  55  in views  41 ,  43 ) is likewise changed to “hold”. Similarly, in response to end user activation of the “resume” operation  46  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the originating user attribute of the corresponding trade object  67 . If the attribute is set to the user ID of the current end user, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  changes trade object  67  status from “hold” back to “active”. In turn the corresponding trade deal  45  status (as displayed at bid/offer information  55  in views  41 ,  43 ) is likewise changed back to active. 
   In response to end user activation of the “cancel” operation  48  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the originating user attribute of the corresponding trade object  67 . If the attribute is set to the user ID of the current end user, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  deletes the trade object  67 , thus removing the corresponding trade deal  45  from floor screen views  41 ,  43 . If the attribute is not set to the user ID of the current end user, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  sets the trade object substatus attribute to “cancel”. In turn, when steps  95  and  96  refresh the deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43 , the subject trade deal  45  is omitted from display. 
   In response to end user activation of the “negotiate” operation  50  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the status and expiration attributes of the corresponding trade object  67 . If the status attribute is set to new or active and not on hold, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  launches instant messaging and sets trigger alerts to other traders of the subject trade as indicated in the invitee attribute of the trade object  67 . The instant messaging is initialized between the originating user of the subject trade (as indicated in the originating user attribute of the trade object  67 ) and the current end user. The deal negotiation system  37   a  obtains the originating user&#39;s email address from the user data table  35  as illustrated by the link to table  35  from the originating user attribute in trade object  67  in  FIG. 4   a . The deal negotiation system  37   a  further logs or stores each message at  71  in  FIG. 4   a . As counter offers are made, the deal negotiation system  37   a  follows create operation  42  steps to create a trade object  67  corresponding to the counter offer and links the counter offers  67   n  to the subject trade deal  45  at  75  in  FIG. 4   a.    
   In response to end user activation of the “Delivery Term Details” operation  52  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the status and expiration attributes of the corresponding trade object  67 . As appropriate, the deal negotiation system  37   a  next checks the originating user attribute of the corresponding trade object  67 . If the attribute is not set to the user ID of the current end user, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  composes a window with delivery location, delivery type and delivery dates information from respective attributes of the corresponding trade object  67 . Otherwise, the deal negotiation system  37   a  composes a window for enabling the end user to specify tolerances as described previously. 
   In response to end user activation of the “add to decision support tools” operation  54  on a displayed trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the status and expiration attributes of the corresponding trade object  67 . If the status attribute is set to new or active and not on hold, then the deal negotiation system  37   a  copies the contents of the corresponding trade object  67  and hence the specifications of the subject trade deal  45  and passes the copied data to the user-desired application  37  or support tool  39 . In particular, the deal negotiation system  37   a  provides the copied data to scheduling application  37   b  and support tools  39   b  thereof, as well as to support tools  39   a  of the deal negotiation system  37   a . The deal negotiation system  37   a  can also provide the copied data to collaborative workflow application  37   c  and support tools  39   c  thereof. 
   Continuing with  FIG. 4   c , at step  99  the deal negotiation system  37   a  checks the status attribute of trade objects  67 . If a trade object  67  is found with a status attribute set to inactive/closed, then the corresponding trade deal  45  has been closed. The deal negotiation system  37   a  accordingly copies the closed deal details  77  to collaborative work flow application  37   c , scheduling application  37   b  and to back office applications and the like for generating the contracts, confirmations and other notifications of the final deal/trade. Word processing forms and merge document technology are employed to accomplish this. In one embodiment, the deal negotiation system  37   a  at this juncture triggers an email message to the vessel broker/owner of the vessel indicated in the closed deal details  77  to secure/reserve the vessel. Other electronic messaging and confirmation is similarly suitable. 
   The deal negotiation system  37   a  continues looping through steps  95  through  99  in  FIG. 4   c  as appropriate to support the end user activity in deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43  (including application of operations  40 ,  42 ,  44 ,  46 ,  48 ,  50 ,  52 ,  54  upon user command). 
     FIG. 5  is a schematic view of the supply chain and related roles in the petroleum industry. The petroleum supply chain  100  is composed of a trading &amp; supply logistics component  102 , a refining operations component  104  and a marketing and distribution component  106 . Each of these components play a role in the supply of crude oil, intermediate feedstock and finished crude products to consumers. 
   Trading &amp; supply logistics component  102  comprises the tasks of moving crude from a well head through a transportation system to a refinery. Crude typically transfers through vessels, pipelines and rail to terminals controlled by a terminal operator  108 . Alternately, the pipeline can be attached directly from the well head source to the refinery. Once the crude is stored in a terminal, barges, tanker ship, other pipelines or trucks are used to transport the crude oil to a refinery. Crude suppliers &amp; brokers  112  interact with refinery supply schedulers  114  to coordinate the logistics (quantities, costs, time-frames, etc.) of supplying crude to a refinery. 
   Refining operations  104  process crude oil into intermediate feedstocks (e.g., butane) and finished crude products (e.g., jet fuel, gasoline) using distillation and/or catalyst-based procedures. Refineries are typically large and complex operations that require significant amounts of planning and analysis to perform at optimum levels. Refinery planning/scheduling  116  operations typically coordinate the logistics of obtaining crude for processing and allocating finished crude products for delivery in an efficient manner. Refinery economist or LP analyst  118  analyze the economics of the refinery operations. The analysis can be based on actual experience and knowledge of current situations and/or through the use of a liner programming (LP) model of the refinery. 
   During all aspects of the petroleum supply chain  100 , traders may buy or sell the crude, intermediate feedstock or finished product in order to maximize their profit. Paper crude traders  120  will trade a petroleum product in the petroleum supply chain  100  without any expectation of ever taking delivery of the commodity. Wet crude traders  124 , on the other hand, trade with an expectation of accepting delivery of a petroleum product for processing or sale. Various aspects of a petroleum trade may require credit &amp; underwriting  122  in order to consummate the trade. Additionally, inspectors are employed at various point in the petroleum supply chain  100  to inspect and report on the quality and/or quantity of crude oil, intermediate feedstocks and petroleum products. 
   Marketing and distribution  126  move petroleum products produced by refinery operations  104  to retail and wholesale consumers. When the movement of petroleum products by ship is involved ship charter brokers  128  are employed to charter appropriate vessels to move the petroleum product to terminals/distribution points close to consumers. Tanker trucks often complete the movement by moving the petroleum products to their final destination (e.g., retail gasoline stations) where product marketers  126  have initiated marketing and sales campaigns to sell the petroleum products. 
   As mentioned above, the deal negotiation system  37   a  provides support tools  39  for the various end users, including refinery supply traders (e.g., wet crude trader  124 ), product traders, brokers, plant analysts (e.g., refinery economist or LP analyst  118 ) and the like. The process of trade deal evaluation is supported by a set of decision support tools that help the end user to quickly evaluate crude oils and petroleum products for supply, blending and trading purposes. These tools include profit margin evaluation tools, component blending and trading tools, transport scheduling tools, arbitrage tools and automated search engine tools. 
   The decision support tools are a set of applications based on supply chain management technology, including Aspen Process Industry Modeling System (PIMS), the leading process industry planning software; Aspen MIMI; and Aspen Bulk &amp; Retail (see  Process Industry Modeling System Training Manual Part  1, Jun. 1, 1998 and  Process Industry Modeling System Training Manual Part  2, Jun. 1, 1998) each by Aspen Technology, Inc., of Cambridge, Mass., the entire teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference. Using these tools, traders and schedulers can quickly identify and evaluate trading and logistics opportunities; specifically, these tools allow traders and schedulers to: estimate the potential value of specific crudes—or combinations of crudes—against a particular set of target refineries in a real-time market environment, evaluate the relative margins of available crudes in order to make the optimal supply decision, determine the value of intermediate feedstocks—either those in the market or those within the company&#39;s own processing facilities, find the most efficient way to acquire or dispose of product blend components and on-spec products to meet the company&#39;s current and strategic business needs and maximize the profit margins, evaluate discounted market blendstocks when they become available on short notice and enhance profitability with faster response to rapidly changing market opportunities. 
   Decision support tools can be used on a stand-alone basis or in conjunction with existing refinery planning and scheduling applications in order to leverage the more detailed linear program (LPs) programming models. The decision support tools provide: instant and secure access from any Web browser, integration with other software platforms (e.g., the deal negotiation system  37   a ), providing immediate access to the benefits of the collaborative workflow application  37   c . Only one click is required to access the decision support tools from the deal negotiation system  37   a.    
   Easy-to-use manual entry screens to input deal information gained from telephone or face-to-face conversations are provided. A library of international product specifications and crude assays is available. The ability to override any input data, including product and components specifications is provided. The decision support tools provide the ability to perform “what if” analysis and perform automatic pricing uploads for a given product and time period from all major price feed sources, including Platt&#39;s, NYMEX, and IPE, as well as third-party private forward price curves. The user can build complex price formulas to value un-priced commodities, based on qualities and relationships to other commodities. 
   In the preferred embodiments, various Crude Oil Evaluation (COE) tools are used to evaluate profit margins by refinery (e.g., COE-R) or by yield and quality (e.g., COE-Q). Additionally, evaluation tools are used to evaluate profit margins for Intermediate Feedstock Selection (IFS). 
   The Crude Oil Evaluation by Refinery (COE-R) tool is designed for Equity Crude Oil Marketers, Refinery Supply Traders and Trading company professionals who need to evaluate the current market value of a crude oil or blend of crude oils against multiple refineries&#39; specification limits in various geographical locations. Since the refinery configuration, crude oils, product specifications, and prices are different for each region the user need the tool to evaluate the profit margins of refineries against the available crude oil or blend of crude oils. This information can be used to increase revenues by trading with refineries that can get the maximum benefits from a given batch of crude oil. 
   The Crude Oil Evaluation by Quality (COE-Q) tool enables traders to perform a quick evaluation of crude oil stocks and transportation costs in order to calculate the incremental net value of each crude oil based upon accurate yield and product quality. Using this tool, the trader performs simultaneous analysis of different crude oils to purchase and make a margin-based real time crude oil deal selection decision. 
   The Intermediate Feedstock Selection (IFS) tool allows traders to evaluate deal negotiation system components to ensure their compliance to the desired intermediate refinery component specifications, required volumes and the acquisition strategy. The trader can use this tool to perform an in-depth analysis of available components and their impact on the overall economics and logistics of a trade deal. 
   The component blending and trading tools include Crude Oil Blending and Trading (COBAT), multi-Component Blending and Trading (CBAT) tools for gasolines (CBAT-G), for fuel oils (CBAT-F) and for diesel fuel blends (CBAT-D). 
   The Crude Oil Blending and Trading (COBAT) tool is used to evaluate the most efficient combination of available crudes to meet refinery specification limits and to complete a refinery supply program. It enables traders to evaluate a wide range of crudes to determine the optimal combination of constrained raw materials needed to produce specific amounts of finished product at the lowest cost. 
   The purpose of blending crude oils is to produce certain types of feedstocks with specific characteristics. Refineries can use these composite feedstocks to optimize their profit while meeting the refinery specifications limits. To make the right selection of components and to optimize the use of downstream conversion units in a refinery, refinery supply traders  116  and analysts  118  need to consider the following: different refinery specifications, monthly refinery requirements, the variety of crude oils available in petroleum markets in geographical zones worldwide, the spectrum of crude oils to produce an intermediate petroleum product that would meet the refinery specifications and fluctuating oil prices. 
   Thus in the preferred embodiment, the COBAT tool is designed for traders and analysts who need to perform a quick “what-if” analysis to determine whether a particular crude or crudes being blended with other crudes will ensure the optimal final result that would meet the specifications and yield required by the processing refinery. Using COBAT, traders may evaluate a wide variety of crude oils to determine the optimal combination of raw materials needed to produce specific amounts of finished product at the lowest cost. It also helps them to evaluate the relative margins of crudes available in the market in order to make the right negotiating or purchasing decision. 
   In one preferred embodiment a trader selects and enters volume and characteristics of each of his current crude oils in stock, recent purchases, and any term supply he may have. This data can be entered manually or uploaded from the company mid office application. The trader sets the specification for the required final crude blend including various properties of the target composite. Preferably the properties include API quality, density, sulphur content, bulk pour point and others, estimation of quality and product yield of particular crude oil. Once the trader has defined characteristics of the desired composite(s), he selects crude oils whose combination might meet the refinery specification limits and produce the required volume of this composite at the lowest price. The negotiation operation discussed above allows the trader to upload information about a wide variety of crude oils available in the market and to see the current prices for each of these. 
   Upon trader command to evaluate, COBAT performs a “what-if” analysis to determine whether the target crude oil composite meets the specifications and yields required by the processing refinery. The trader makes a business decision based on the results of the analysis performed by the COBAT tool. The trader reviews the results and makes a purchasing decision. As soon as the trader has made a decision to buy, he employs the negotiation operation on the corresponding posted trade deal  45  of deal negotiation system screen views  41 ,  43  to negotiate the deal. The trader closes the deal, saves the results and exits the application  37   a.    
   The multi-Component Blending and Trading (CBAT) tool is used to rapidly evaluate the marginal value of various blend stocks available in the market, providing traders with the most economic way to acquire or dispose of blend components to satisfy long/short positions. The tool functionalities may be used for various grades of gasoline including Reformulated, Conventional and CARB Gasolines (CBAT-G tool), Fuel Oils of various qualities (CBAT-F tool), and kerosene, jet fuel, and diesel fuels blends (CBAT-D tool). Restated, multi-component blending is a complex process that allows Traders and Analysts to make the best use of the available blendstocks in the market. Multi-component blending produces a variety of refined products, including different grades of gasoline, jet fuel oil, diesel oil, or lubricants. Each blend component has its own unique physical and chemical characteristics or properties. These components can be mixed with other components to create a finished product specification. 
   The Component Blending and Trading—Gasoline (CBAT-G) tool helps the trader to choose the type and quantity of each available blendstock needed to produce the desired volume of specific grades of gasoline. It also provides the actual value of each gasoline component, which allows the trader to calculate the marginal value of each gasoline component to produce or to buy. 
   By way of background, to produce what is known as finished gasoline, several components must be mixed together. Depending on what grade of gasoline one is trying to obtain, the target product may include six or more blending components. The quality and marketability of the finished product are determined by: (i) the product compliance with the gasoline specifications; and (ii) the product ability to meet local regulatory and economic requirements in different geographical locations. 
   Employing the CBAT-G tool, one can select and define the target product. In the preferred embodiment, the user scrolls up or down a predefined list to find the desired product to be made and selects the name of the desired gasoline grade from the list of predefined products. One may select as many products as desired, depending on how many gasoline blends are desired to be produced. Next, the user views the product specification for each selected gasoline blend. The product specification lists various gasoline properties, such as API gravity, octane number, sulfur content, etc. The user may review the gasoline blend specifications, or modify it according to desired specifications for gasoline performance. To do that, the user types in a new value for a property desired to be changed and presses a “Save Data” button at the bottom of the page. Once the user has saved the modified specifications, it will be automatically added to the list of custom blends below the predefined list of original products. 
   Once the user has defined characteristics of the desired final product(s), the user selects gasoline components whose combination might meet the target product specification and produce the required volume of this product at the lowest possible cost. The negotiation operation (discussed above) allows the user to select from a wide variety of gasoline components available in the market and to see the current pricing information for each of them. The user enters the desired minimum and maximum quantity and price for each added component. Once he has finished defining the components, CBAT-G evaluates the components to determine the optimal combination of gasoline components. 
   While evaluating the optimal combination of gasoline components, CBAT-G considers the availability and price of the optional product, compares it to the same parameters of the required components, and decides whether or not it should be used for blending. An optional parameter tells CBAT-G that the minimum volume specified is a lower threshold limit. This means CBAT-G will choose the best solution for either zero or between the minimum and maximum allowed but not between zero and the minimum. If the optional component is used for blending, the volume will be greater than the minimum amount mentioned. If the option parameter is not used, CBAT-G will use at least the minimum quantity of each added component. 
   Depending on whether or not the user has any gasoline components on hand, he may start the evaluation or continue the selection process. If he decides to use the gasoline components he already has in stock, he proceeds to the In-Stock or On-Hand Components view. Otherwise, he presses the Evaluate button to start the data analysis. 
   Once CBAT-G completes the analysis of data, it displays the Result page (see  FIG. 13   b ). While evaluating the combination of existing gasoline blend components, CBAT-G tries to find a feasible and optimal solution for the most cost-effective gasoline blend that will meet the target gasoline specifications and yields desired by the processing refinery. In one example, after having analyzed all possible combinations of the selected gasoline blend components, CBAT-G chose the most cost-effective combination of the Negotiation Center MTBE, Normal Butane, Lt Alkylate and Russian Naphtha to produce the desired volume of Colonial PL Conv 93. The target product is checked to determine if it meets the desired specification requirements. The specification page for the Colonial P/L Conv 93gasoline will appear. The top portion of the specification page indicates the proportion of each blending component in the finished product. The lower part of the specification page shows blended products of the finished product that meet all specification requirements, with the API Gravity, Research Octane, Motor Octane, Benzene and other properties values falling between the lower and upper bounds imposed by the processing refinery. The user clicks the Save Data button to save the final product specification to their local system. 
   The Component Blending and Trading—Diesel (CBAT-D) tool helps the trader to choose the type and quantity of each available blendstock needed to produce the desired volume of specific grades of diesel oil. 
   By way of overview, the purpose of distillate blending is to manufacture a variety of products including various grades of diesel oil and kerosene, jet fuel oil, and gas oil. The actual production of the amounts of specific products fluctuates within limited parameters, based on seasonal demands or economic market situation. During the blending process, various refinery streams are mixed together to create finished products that should conform to the refinery product specification and meet local regulatory and economic requirements in different geographical locations. 
   The CBAT-D tool enables the user to: evaluate feasibility and cost-effectiveness of specific blendstocks available in the market, find the optimal way to acquire or dispose of blend components to meet the company current and planned business needs and maximize the profit margins and rapidly estimate the potential value of finished products based on blending components specifications. 
   Employing CBAT-D, the user selects the name of the required distillate blend from a Blend Specifications table. The user may select as many products as he likes, depending on how many distillate blends he wants to produce, but he can add only one product at a time. Before beginning to enter the quantity and price information for the desired distillate product(s), the user may view and modify the specification for the selected product. The specification is set by the ASTM and lists basic properties of the selected jet fuel, such as API gravity, Sulfur Content, Flash Point, Freezing Point, Smoke Point, Pour Point, etc. The CBAT-D functionality enables the user to create a new product specification by modifying the existing specification properties as viewed in a separate working window. 
   Changing the specification does not modify the underlying database entry. The saved specification will only be available to the author of the specification. Once the user has saved the modified product specification, it will be automatically added to the list of custom blends below the predefined list of original products. 
   Once the user has defined characteristics of the desired final product(s), he selects blend components whose combination will meet the final product specification and produce the required volume of this product at the lowest cost. The deal negotiation screen views  41 , 43  and above discussed functionality allows the user to select from a wide variety of distillate components available in the market and to see the current pricing information for each of them. 
   Depending on whether the plan is to use any Distillate components in stock for blending, the evaluation may be started or the selection process may continue. 
   To choose certain amounts of in stock components for blending with components selected from the deal negotiation system: the user selects the desired distillate blendstock from the In-Stock or On-Hand Components view, selects the desired blending date from the dropdown list box, enters the name of the destination place for the product delivery, presses the Add button at the bottom of the screen to move the selected component into the table, closes the dialog box, enters the maximum quantity he wants to use and the cost of the component, checks the Optional checkbox if needed and finally presses the Evaluate button to start the data analysis. 
   Once CBAT-D completes the analysis of data the user has entered, it displays the Result page similar to the one shown in  FIG. 6 . While evaluating the combination of selected distillate components, CBAT-D tries to find the optimal solution for the most feasible and cost-effective distillate blend that will meet the target product specifications and yields desired by the processing refinery. 
   In one example, after having analyzed all possible combinations of the selected blend components, CBAT-D chose the most cost-effective combination of the deal negotiation system HT Kerosene and Straight-run Kerosene to produce the desired volume of Jet Fuel. To make sure that the final product meets the specification requirements, a user clicks on the downward arrow in the Resultant Product Blends page. The specification page for the Jet Fuel blend then appears. The upper portion of the specification page indicates the composition of the finished product (40% of HT Kerosene+60% of Straight-run Kerosene). The lower part of the specification page indicates that the target product meets all specification requirements, with the API Gravity, Sulfur content, Smoke Point and other properties values falling between the lower and upper bounds imposed by the processing refinery. To user saves the final product specification to their local system, by clicking the Save Data button. 
   The Component Blending and Trading—Fuel (CBAT-F) tool helps the trader to choose the type and quantity of each available blendstock needed to produce the desired volume of specific grades of fuel oil. The purpose of Fuel Oil Blending is to manufacture a variety of products including various grades of bunker oil, furnace oil and heating oil. 
   By way of background, during the blending process, various refinery streams are mixed together to make a finished fuel oil product with specific qualities and characteristics. Typically, a refinery uses its own raw materials, but sometimes a trader has to purchase blendstocks in the open market to produce a specific amount of the target product at the lowest cost. While evaluating various blendstocks to purchase, the trader should consider the following: the processing refinery&#39;s specification limits, seasonal demands (i.e., during the winter, a refinery produces more heating oil) and economic market situation (fluctuations in product prices and demand/supply balance). 
   The CBAT-F Tool enables the user to evaluate feasibility and cost-effectiveness of specific blendstocks available in the market and to rapidly estimate the potential value of finished products based on blending components specifications. 
   In the preferred embodiment, the CBAT-F tool is used to select the name of the required Fuel Oil blend from the Blend Specifications List Box in the Target Product table. A user elects as many products as desired, depending on how many fuel oil blends he wants to produce. To view the specification for the desired product, the user clicks on the downward arrow button to the right of the product name. The specification page will appear. The specification lists basic properties of the selected fuel oil, such as API gravity, Flash Point, Pour Point, Viscosity, etc. 
   To modify the product specification according to a user&#39;s own quality requirements, the user types in a new value for a property he wants to change and presses the Save Data button at the bottom of the page. The specification will be saved to the user&#39;s local system (note: changing the specification will not modify the underlying database). The saved specification will only be available to the author of the specification. Once the user has saved the modified specification, it will be automatically added to the list of custom blends below the predefined list of original products. To move it to the target view, the user clicks on the button to the right of the list. 
   Once the user has defined characteristics of the desired final product(s), he needs to select fuel oil blend components whose combination will meet the target product specification and produce the required volume of this product at the lowest cost. The deal negotiation screen views  41 ,  43  functionality allows the user to select from a wide variety of fuel oil components available in the market and to see the current pricing information for each of them. 
   To select components using the negotiation operation, the user clicks on the Add button in the upper right comer of the view. The Select Component and Location dialog appears. The user selects the Fuel Oil component he wants to use for blending from the Components list box. The user select the desired blending date from the drop-down list box. He enters the name of the destination place for the product delivery into the Location box. He next presses the Add button at the bottom of the dialog to move the selected components to the Negotiation Center Components view. To close the dialog, the user presses the Close button. If the user wants to view and edit specs for the selected components, he clicks on the arrow button to the right of the component name. The user enters the desired minimum and maximum quantity and price for each added component. Once he has correctly defined all the selected components, the Evaluate button appears at the bottom of the screen allowing him to start the data analysis. 
   While evaluating the optimal combination of Fuel oil components, CBAT-F will consider the availability and price of the optional product, compare it to the same parameters of the required components, and decide whether or not it should be used for blending. The user checks the Optional checkbox if needed. Note that checking Optional tells CBAT-F that the minimum volume specified is a lower threshold limit. This means CBAT-F will choose the best solution for either zero or between the minimum and maximum allowed but not between zero and the minimum. If the optional component is used for blending, its volume will be greater that the minimum amount mentioned. If the user leaves the checkbox unchecked, CBAT will use at least the minimum quantity of each added component. 
   Depending on whether the user has any Fuel Oil components on hand, he may start the evaluation or continue the selection process. If the user decides to use the Fuel Oil components already in stock, he proceeds to the In-Stock or On-Hand Components view, otherwise, he presses the Evaluate button to start the data analysis (note: the Evaluate button appears at the bottom of the screen only if all necessary components are properly defined, if the definition was incomplete, the user will see an appropriate warning instead). 
   Once CBAT-F completes the analysis of data entered by the user, it displays the Result page similar to the one shown in  FIG. 6 . 
   While evaluating the combination of existing fuel oil components, CBAT-F tries to find the optimal solution for the most feasible and cost-effective Fuel Oil blend that will meet the target product specifications and yields desired by the processing refinery. 
   In one example 700 bbl of fuel oil are required, after having analyzed all possible combinations of the selected blend components, CBAT-F chose 400 bbl of the optional Naphtha, 200 bbl of the required Heavy Oil Cracker Cycle Oil, and only 100 bbl of Heavy Oil Cracker Distillate that is the most costly of all components. The finished product meets the target product volume requirements (700 bbl) and maximizes the profit margin ($3800). 
   The foregoing decision support tools are executed as non-client computer resident processes as illustrated in  FIG. 7 . Typically, a user on a client computer  25  ( FIG. 1 ) launches a browser program (e.g., a Web browser, such as Microsoft® Internet Explorer). The browser program accepts a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) as a target address (e.g., www.petrovantage.com\lp-models) for a host computer  27  ( FIG. 1 ). The host computer  27  manages and executes linear programs to provide analysis of a specific aspect of petroleum trading, refining or logistics. Hosting the decision support tools  39  on a non-client computer  27  avoids problems associated with specific client computer  25  installations and provides for improved maintenance situations. Providing the decision support tools  39  on an Internet-connected host  27  allows users access from any Internet-connected client computer  25  with effectively unlimited availability. 
   A conventional linear program for running petroleum trading, refining or logistics models is Aspen PIMS. The models requires various inputs that are typically supplied through an input spreadsheet (e.g., Microsoft® Excel) read by the linear program. Embodiments of the present invention replace the spreadsheet input mechanism with a series of graphical user interface screens that allow the user to enter input data in real-time about the specific petroleum trading, refining or logistics problem as described above for the CBAT, COBAT and COE tools. Additionally, embodiments of the present invention can receive input data about the specific petroleum trading, refining or logistics problem as a programming object (e.g., trade object  67 ). 
   Conditioning of the various inputs to the linear programming models allows for improved reliability. Conditioning involves placing the various inputs in better order for processing and can include format and units of measure conversions (e.g., API v. specific gravity). 
   Analysis of a particular petroleum trading, refining or logistics problem includes receiving the input data describing the problem to be solved. This data is conditioned such that the linear program operates most effectively. Additionally, certain equations that make up the linear programming model are modified to account for the fact that multiple instances of the linear program may be executing. In particular, known unreliable paths of existing linear programming models are avoided, or minimized, in the equations that form embodiments of the present invention. The modifications provide for increased stability in a multi-instance environment. 
   Management of the linear programming model on a host computer  27  involves a cycle of launch/execute, check status and close. Multiple instances of the linear programming model can be running simultaneously. The host computer  27  periodically checks the status by “pinging” a specific instance. In the preferred embodiment, status checking/pinging occurs every three seconds. Pinging is a non-resource intensive operation directed at an instance to determine whether it is still executing (i.e., not hung). An executing instance will respond to a ping. This allows the host computer  27  to clean-up instances that have “hung” (i.e., are no longer responding to a ping). An example of a system that supports pinging is the Microsoft® Component Object Model (COM) system. 
   Output from the linear programming analysis is packaged using standard Internet protocols for display (e.g., HTML or XML with Cascading Style Sheets). The output is sent over the network  23  using standard HTTP communication standards. This output mechanism allows a standard Web browser to display the output from the linear programming analysis, where conventional systems typically produce output as a spreadsheet-formatted or database-formatted file. 
   The combination of Internet access to a non-client computer resident linear programming model (included as part of software program  31 ), use of HTML protocol for reporting, use of HTTP protocol for communication, providing stability through variable/equation conditioning and real-time access provides a much improved user experience for analysis of petroleum trading, refining or logistics problems. Further tools are available in the preferred embodiment of deal negotiation system  37   a . For instance, the arbitrage analyzer tool is designed for refinery supply traders, trade houses, cash brokers, ship brokers, producers/marketers, and the like, enabling them to automatically monitor and analyze fluctuations in the economics of crude oils and refined products. The tool continuously monitors the changing market opportunities, including cross commodity prices and freight-arbitrage relationships, in order to evaluate margin opportunities (e.g., FOB versus CIF decisions). Additionally, users can quickly respond to short notice market opportunities and make timely decisions to capture the advantageous yields versus cost opportunities. 
     FIG. 6   a  is a block diagram of an arbitrage analyzer  310  configured according to an embodiment of the present invention. An arbitrage relationship is defined as having two elements (offerings) that will be adjusted and compared in order to determine if a predefined spread has been triggered. 
   In a preferred embodiment of the present invention elements A  312  and B  314  define two elements of an arbitrage relationship. Adjustments are made to the elements A  312  and B  314  using functions f 1   318  and f 2   320 , respectively. These adjustments allow for more effective comparisons. Functions f 1   318  and f 2   320  take inputs X 1   316  and X 2   322  in order to produce outputs. The difference between adjusted elements A  312  and B  314  is compared (e.g., less than, greater than or equal to) to a predefined spread, S  324 , by arbitrage function  326  to determine if a trigger, T  328 , should be activated. 
   In the simplest case f 1   318  and f 2   320  are the identify function and elements A  312  and B  314  are processed through the arbitrage analyzer unadjusted. In more interesting cases, elements A  312  and B  314  are adjusted using algorithms and internal and external data to condition those elements for comparison. Inputs X 1   316  and X 2   322  need not be simple scalar values, these inputs can be the results of economic evaluation tools (e.g., COE-R) or blending analysis tools (e.g., COBAT), described above. 
   In one example element A  312  represents an available crude oil in one part of the world (e.g., Brent crude) while element B  314  represents an available crude in another part of the world (e.g., West Texas Intermediate). Functions f 1   318  and f 2   320  act on elements A  312  and B  314  using data X 1   316  and X 2   322 . This data will typically include the commodity (crude) price. Additionally the present invention will factor in other external data elements such as freight options/costs, financing options/costs, contract and delivery times, storage options/costs, the time value of money, and the like. The results of all the adjustments are normalized into a price for each arbitrage element. For example, the Brent price might come out to $34 per barrel, whereas the West Texas Intermediate price might come out to $35 per barrel. A trigger T  328  can be set to detect when the price per barrel of these two commodities differ by more than $1 per barrel. The triggers can be visual, audible and/or activated to execute another processes (e.g., a messaging or electronic mail system). 
   This “geographical arbitrage” is only one example of the types of arbitrage analysis available in the present invention. The arbitrage elements can represent crude oil, intermediate feedstocks and/or petroleum products. Arbitrage relationships do not necessarily have to be defined on identical element types (e.g., crude v. crude, or product v. product). Interesting arbitrage relationships can be defined on dissimilar elements (e.g., Brent crude v. U.S. unleaded gasoline). 
   In another preferred embodiment a user-interactive graphical user interface (GUI) is provided to define trader specific arbitrage views (e.g., Brent crude v. West Texas Intermediate). The GUI allows a user to select a specific region of the world (e.g., by clicking on an interactive computer map) and view a list of posted crude oil prices from online pricing feeds, such as Reuters or Platts. The use can choose a desired crude oil and select another crude oil to make up an arbitrage relationship. Graphically this is accomplished by using interactive graphic tools to draw a line (i.e., define an arbitrage relationship) between two geographical regions and selecting specific crude oil products. Once an arbitrage relationship is defined a graph based on the associated data from the online pricing feeds is produced. The graph provides a visual comparison of price differences between the crude oils that make up the defined arbitrage relationship. Alarms and triggers may also be set execute when the price differential reaches, exceeds, or drops below a predefined limit. Alarms and triggers can be audible, visual or based in other mediums. 
     FIG. 6   b  illustrates a graphical user interface for defining and viewing an arbitrage relationship configured according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention. A world map  131  is displayed in order to focus the user&#39;s selection of a particular crude oil on a specific geographic region (e.g., the North Sea v. Texas). The user invokes (e.g., by right-clicking a mouse button) the selection tool  130  to display a list of available crude oil for that geographic region. For example, when the selection tool  130  is invoked over the North Sea are off the coast of the United Kingdom, North Sea 1, Brent and North Sea 2 crude oils are displayed. The geographic region boundaries are preset, and re-configurable. Selection tool  130  allows a user to select an available crude oil and using a pointing device (e.g., a mouse), to draw a line  132  to another geographic region of the world represented on the world map  131 . Once the line  132  is drawn the selection tool  130  is invoked for the end-point of the line  132 . For example, if the end-point is located near Texas, US, the selection tool  130  can display West Texas Intermediate (WTI), East Texas Intermediate (ETI) and South Texas Intermediate (STI). The user now selects an additional available crude oil to define an arbitrage relationship. An arbitrage charting tool displays an arbitrage chart  133  that shows the difference in per barrel price of each of the selected crude oils over a predefined time. The arbitrage analyzer tool allows a trader to visualize differentiations among arbitrage relationship elements. 
   Embodiments of the present invention provide petroleum trading, refining and logistics aware search engines. These specialized search engines recognize attributes associated specifically with petroleum trading and logistics. The search engines contain search-library knowledge bases which define attributes for a specific domain (e.g., petroleum trading and logistics). These attributes provide enhanced navigation of petroleum-based or logistics-based Web sites or other data stores. The petroleum aware search engines can be configured to navigate a specific Web site (e.g., a user&#39;s internal Web site) or they can be configured to crawl over a series of external Web sites. 
   For example, a trader may be “looking for a deal on Brent crude”. The domain aware search engine will recognize that this query is a crude oil trade query and associate specific attributes from the search-library knowledge base with it. In this case, the commodity type, location, price and availability dates attributes will be used to search for records, pages or other storage elements that relate to “a deal on Brent crude”. Each record, page or other storage element found will display values for commodity type, location, price and availability dates attributes. 
   Refinery supply planners periodically create refinery supply plans. These plans typically model the supply needs and expected output of a specific refinery for a specific period of time (e.g., monthly). In conventional systems these plans are not adjusted until the next planning period. Using the domain aware search engine of the present invention refinery supply planners can encode searching requirements to uncover economic, logistic or other interesting developments in supply elements (e.g., a price drop in the Brent crude used as input to a refinery) or output elements (e.g., gas price increase 20 cents/gallon). The automated detection of these external changes allows a refinery supply planner to modify his plan on a weekly, daily or almost continuous basis to achieve the highest possible margins for his refinery. 
   The domain aware search engine can be configured to search various types of data sources, including Web pages and networked databases. In one preferred embodiment the domain aware search engine can search deal negotiation system  37   a . Alternate data sources include published market price provides (e.g., Platts, NYMEX), internal customer price/availability forecasts as well as private market maker Web sites (e.g., EnronOnline.com) and public markets (e.g., HoustonStreet.com, RedMeteor.com). The markets providers may or may not be in a partnership relationship with the searcher. 
     FIG. 6   c  illustrates a petroleum trading, refining and logistics aware search engine configured according an embodiment of the present invention. A series of server computers  143 ,  144 ,  145  are connected to a network  146 . Each server computer  143 ,  144 ,  145  may contain searchable content. A domain-aware search engine  141  executes on client computer  140  and searches on computers connected to network  146  for content using domain specific knowledge stored in search library knowledge base  142 . 
   Transport selection and optimization tools enable the petroleum trader to screen and select available fleets, vessels, barges and pipeline cycles for the transportation of specific cargos and to evaluate the most economical way to deliver a product to its final destination. 
   With regard to vessel scheduling application  37   b  ( FIG. 2 ), bulletin board technology is employed. The vessel scheduling bulletin board enables brokers and vessel owners to post available dates and times for transportation by subject vessel. In a preferred embodiment, the postings are supported by the data stored in vessel objects  81  ( FIG. 4   b ). The vessel name and owner name may initially remain anonymous. A unique identifier (vessel ID) and class (from a predefined class type) sufficiently identify the vessel and capacity. In addition to on-line browsing of the bulletin board of available vessels, scheduling application  37   b  provides a search function or operation. The search function searches for available vessels given a specified load/quantity, location and delivery dates of a subject petroleum commodity. The user can add specific filtering ‘rules’ to refine the search to include company specific operating philosophy (e.g., to select only double hulled vessels). For example, the “add to decision support tools” operation  54  downloads quantity, location and delivery date data of a user-selected deal  45  displayed in the deal negotiation system screens  41 ,  43 . Scheduling application  37   b  uses the downloaded data (e.g., trade object  67 ) as input to the search function. The search function compares the input quantity to load capacity of various classes of vessels and consequently identifies appropriate vessel classes for the subject deal  45 . Based on the identified vessel classes appropriate for the subject deal  45 , the search function looks at schedules and waterway restrictions of specific vessels of that identified class. The search function compares the input delivery dates to the schedules of the vessels ( FIG. 4   b ) and determines available suitable vessels. The search function compares the input location to the waterway restrictions  91  of the identified and determined vessels and accordingly filters out the vessels that are restricted from the target (input) load/delivery locations. The remaining date-wise available vessels that meet the delivery port requirements are candidate vessels that the search function recommends on output. 
   Cost of each of the candidate vessels is calculated based on a completed voyage as determined by related market variables (load port to load port), capacity transported, clean/dirty status and cost rate found in respective vessel objects  81  ( FIG. 4   b ). The search function may also output respective transportation costs of each candidate vessel for the given deal  45 . 
   The deal negotiation system  37   a  and other decision support tools  39  use the results of the scheduling application  37   b  search function to generate a delivered commodity price. In particular, for a given trade deal  45 , the deal negotiation system  37   a  sums the commodity price and transportation cost to form the delivered commodity price in arbitrage analyses and various deal negotiation system screen displays  33  (including the main deal negotiation view  41  and subscreen/tab views  43 ). 
     FIG. 12  is an illustration of a graphical user interface for vessel searching and optimization configured according to an embodiment of the present invention. Three panels are displayed. The Search for a Ship panel  260  provides an interface to specify search attributes for use in locating an available ship to carry a cargo. These attributes include: quantity and type of the cargo, port to/from information and various required attributes of the ship. The List of Ships that are Available panel  270  displays a list of ship that are available and meet the requirements of the search attributes defined in the Search for a Ship panel  260 . The name of the ship may not be displayed, or may be a pseudo-name, such that the actual name is not revealed until later in the contracting process. The List of Ships that are Available panel  270  display various ship specific attributes, including: World Scale Rate, last cargo and flag, among others. The List of Ships that are Available panel  270  allows a user to select one of the available ships and have it appear in the Select a Ship panel  280 . A ship in the Select a Ship panel  280  can be “put on subs” using the Put on Subject button  284 . Putting a ship “on subs” effectively holds a ship of a predetermined amount of time without committing to contract for it. The Notify button  286  informs the ship owner of a offer to contract for the ship. The owner&#39;s name may not be available to the user at this point. 
   The vessel scheduling application  37   b  may be integrated with other decision support tools  39  (e.g., CBAT-G) to provide vessel scheduling support to a petroleum product trade deal  45 .  FIG. 13   a  illustrates the CBAT-G tool being used to evaluate (using Evaluate button  296 ) in stock or on hand components (displayed in the In Stock or On Hand Components panel  294 ) and components available for trading (displayed in Trade Floor Components panel  292 ). The blend specification of the desired resultant petroleum product is selected using the Blend Specification panel  290 . 
     FIG. 13   b  illustrates a graphical user interface for displaying resultant petroleum product blends resulting from a CBAT-G evaluation. Resultant Product Blends panel  300  displays the blend specification and various related attributes, including: volume, cost per barrel and value of the resultant blend. The resultant In Stock or On Hand Components panel  304  now provides a Remove From Available Stock button  308  to affect the allocation of various components to the resultant product blend. The resultant Trade Floor Components panel  302  now provides a Make a Deal button  306 . Make a Deal button  306  launches a decision support tool that will provide access to vessel scheduling application  37   b  such that the user can optimize his selection of vessel used to ship components of the resultant petroleum product blend, or the resultant petroleum product blend itself. 
   A collaborative workflow environment  200  ( FIG. 8 ) configured according to an embodiment of the present invention provides automation for routine business process standardization, reduces error rate and frees users to perform higher-level tasks. One key aspect of the collaborative workflow environment is the ability to communicate and transfer data among users performing roles in a collaborative workflow process. The Collaborative Workflow Environment (“CWE”) is an easy to use point and click way to automate work processes and collaborate with partners. It allows for customization of these processes/activities through a ‘builder’ interface which produces templates matching a business process flow. The templates are applied to the matching business condition/transaction and keeps track of the various activities for a customer. The Collaborative Workflow Process (“CWP”) allows for alarms, alerts, data sharing, discussion groups, and integration with internal and external systems reducing the cost of business and maximizing efficiency.) The collaborative workflow environment  200  can integrate with other systems (e.g., via workflow object) to provide integrated collaborative workflow. This enhances the coordination of team activities in both normal and upset situations. The collaborative workflow environment  200  also provides high visibility of end-to-end supply chain points. 
   The transient nature of many crude oil, intermediate feed stock and crude products deals requires an efficient mechanism for coordinating the many tasks associated with a trade deal  45 . Conventional methods of telephone communication and paper task tracking are costly and error prone. A method of providing automated workflow management would reduce the cost and increase the accuracy of conducting crude oil, intermediate feedstock or petroleum product trades. 
   During the lifecycle of a trade, four types of interactions are typically repeated again and again: (1) iterative work review and approval processes, such as working with the refinery planner and economist to produce the crude oil basket; (2) notifying other participants in planning, trading and logistics processes, such as confirming deals with the refinery scheduler, ship broker, storage and terminal operator and inspection surveying company; (3) tracking, aligning, or transferring work from one person or group to another, such as passing the deal sheet to the accounting and scheduling groups; and (4) transferring and transmitting data among different software systems, such as transferring data to back office and risk management systems. 
   The present invention collaborative workflow environment  200  allows user to deal rapidly with these activities, dramatically reducing the time and complexity necessary to coordinate the multiple resources required to close deals and arrange associated logistics. It also enables rapid response internally and from business partners to unexpected deviations and opportunities in supply chain logistics, commodity markets, or transportation markets. 
   In order to help customers establish the collaborative trading and logistics networks that make this goal a reality, the collaborative workflow environment  200  enables: (1) internal processes which are completely secure and internal to a company, such as coordinating trading with supply planning and scheduling; (2) private processes conducted between a company and its closest partners, such as managing long-term crude supply contracts and long-term ship charters; (3) public processes which are conducted in the general marketplace, such as the purchase of a large lot of gasoline or chartering of a vessel for a specific voyage. 
   In a preferred embodiment, the collaborative workflow environment  200  is delivered via role-based consoles, thereby increasing staff productivity by capturing the relationships between people, organizations, deals, and deadlines; and coordinating and synchronizing the work within and between companies. The collaborative workflow environment  200  can also automatically send notifications, route records for review and completion, and trigger the electronic transfer of pertinent data from the one business system to another (internal or external). 
   Supporting each console is a respective set of pre-configured collaborative workflow processes  210  (CWPs) which represent common work practices such as: close deal notification, close deal tracking, refinery upset, crude basket, ship late, pre-deal, product long/short, ship charter, inspection nomination and tanker lease inquiry are created as predefined templates. Additionally, client customized workflow processes can be defined. Once implemented, these workflow templates are modifiable to reflect specific needs and implement a company&#39;s own best practices. 
   Supply chain team members around the globe can work together economically in real time using the collaborative workflow environment. Changes in delivery schedules, upsets, or other unforeseen events are quickly broadcast to team members who can make contingency plans. Money and time are leveraged by circulating time-critical information quickly among integrated team members. Important milestones can be focused on without distraction. Ease of use puts all pieces of information at user&#39;s fingertips. Messages and alerts are displayed in the message center, flagged by their level of importance. Multiple collaborative work processes  200  (CWPs) can be active at the same time; the CWE console organizes them, sorts them, and flags them to the user. The provided set of templates, designed by leading industry experts, give system analysts a jumpstart on process design. Flexible architecture allows for the design of work processes to suit the company&#39;s requirements. Powerful messaging and discussion group features provide for the design of activities that reach out to every supply chain team member simultaneously. Links with the Deal negotiation application  37   a  provides automated workflows that originate at trade deal  45  closing. Links with the decision support tools  39  allow inclusion of decision support analysis into a workflow. Links provide for launching internal processes that retrieve information to feed back into a workflow. 
   The collaborative work environment provides  200  a robust infrastructure that allows a user to establish and automate a company&#39;s work processes. A work process, known also as collaborative work process  210 , or CWP, is an automated and controlled flow of tasks performed by multiple participants. The tasks are linked together into a structured flow of work that can involve as many participants as the user defines and can consist of as many steps as needed. CWE&#39;s robust infrastructure allows business process experts and system analysts to design and automate workflows that link together people, deals, and deadlines to accomplish time-critical activities. The CWE  200  infrastructure contains the following key features: set of predefined workflow templates, a flexible architecture, messaging and discussion group features, links with the Deal negotiation application  37   a , links with the DSTs  39 . In one preferred embodiment these features are represented in a hierarchical structure of CWE  200 , CWP  210 , business processes  220 ,  222  and activities  230 ,  232 ,  234  (see  FIG. 7 ). 
   Each activity that comprises a CWP  210  is performed by the person responsible for its functions. Most activities  230 ,  232 ,  234  can have one and only one owner, discussion groups can have multiple owners. Since activities  230 ,  232 ,  234  can span all aspects of the industry, CWP  210  participants can be any of the following: contract administrators, credit managers, inspectors, ship brokers, terminal operators, pipeline operators, traders (e.g., crude traders, intermediate feedstock traders and refined product traders), schedulers (e.g., supply schedulers, crude refinery schedulers, products refinery schedulers, logistics schedulers), planners (e.g., refinery planners, refinery demand planners). CWE templates can specify individuals or roles as the initiator and/or responder. The roles will be resolved at run time allowing for easy maintenance as people with an organization changes job responsibilities. Typically, of course, a particular CWP  210  covers a set of work processes involving one segment of work, so its participants are those who perform that segment. For example, a refinery upset CWP would include a different set of participants, or roles (see  FIG. 9 ) than the participants/roles involved in a Closed Deal Notification Message CWP (see  FIG. 10 ). 
   Depending on a user&#39;s role in the organization, and their participation in one or more CWPs  210 , a user may work with CWE  200  in one or more ways. A user may be an initiator of an activity, the initiator is the owner of the activity, and therefore responsible for the successful and timely completion of the activity. An initiator will track their own activity, ensure that necessary responses are received, and send out necessary confirmations. An initiator may also track the other activities in their CWP  210 . 
   A respondent to an activity has the role of responding with the correct information within the allotted time-frame. This means that the respondent must keep an eye on the message center to watch for incoming messages. A respondent will also want to monitor the CWP  210  as a whole, to watch its progress and to be aware of any changes or delays. 
   Managers and other interested parties (i.e., “watchers”) will want to maintain an overview of CWPs  210  in progress at their site. They might filter the CWP  210  list to show only overdue CWPs  210 , so they know when action might be required. 
   The CWE  200  has its own console, the CWE view  240 , where a user can see a list of active CWPs  210 . In addition, CWE  200  uses many other panels to display the full set of features that make up a CWP  200 . In one preferred embodiment the CWE view  240  displays all the CWPs  210  in an organization each work process can be expanded to display its sub-processes (e.g., business processes  220 ,  222 ) and activities (e.g., activities  230 ,  232 ,  234 ). The message center displays any messages that come to the user as part of a CWP. 210 . The instant message console displays real-time instant messaging discussions that come to the user as part of a CWP  210 . The time-line provides a linear, graphical view of the linked tasks contained in a CWP  210 , organized by date. The time-line shows task dependencies at a glance. The spider diagram shows relationships between CWP  210  work and players (persons performing roles). 
   The CWE view  240  ( FIG. 11   a ) displays the list of work processes in the CWE  200  as configured by the system administrator based upon which CWPs  210  are active at the present time. Each user logged into the CWE  200  can see all the work processes set up for his or her organization, but the list of CWPs  210  viewable may depend on the role associated with the user&#39;s login ID.  FIG. 11   a  shows a list of four active CWPs  210  for a planner. The list of CWPs  210  will change dynamically, throughout the day or even from hour to hour, depending on the CWPs  210  at the site and their status. Once all the activities in a CWP  210  are completed, the CWP  210  is moved to an archive. 
   List of CWPs  210  can be expanded to show more detail. Clicking on the plus (+) sign next to a CWP  210  in CWE view  240  expands it to display its business processes  220 ,  222  and activities  230 ,  232 ,  234 .  FIG. 11   b  shows an expanded Closed Deal Notification CWP. This CWP sends out messages to key players once a deal is closed. Notifications to individuals can be configured in the builder, based on changes, past due status, or other milestones. A business process  220 ,  222  is illustrated as Notification to Primary Party by System  250 . The business process has a beginning and end date. Two activities, Notify Internal Trader Team  252  and Notify Mid-Office System  254  are also illustrated (note: this CWP  210  has many more activities than are shown here). Each activity  230 ,  232 ,  234  is associated with an initiator and a respondent, and with beginning and end dates. 
     FIG. 11   c  illustrates activity  230 ,  232 ,  234  details. Each activity listed in a CWP  210  is underlined, enabling the user to click on it and see its activity details dialog. The Activity Details dialog lists all the information contained in the activity as well as any documents attached by initiators or respondents. Activity data can be updated by users who have edit privileges and a change log will record the updates. Users who has reader access will see these updates when reviewing the activity. 
   While this invention has been particularly shown and described with references to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the invention encompassed by the appended claims. 
   Trading in petroelum-based products involves crude oil itself as well as many derivative products. For example, intermediate feed stocks are produced from crude oil and refined to produce petroleum products. Any final crude-based produce may be generally referred to as a petroleum product. The present invention considers a trade deal  45  to cover any crude-based product. 
   A vessel as used in reference to the present invention may be a ship, tanker, truck, airplane, or any other transportation container used to carry cargo. 
   The computer architecture of host server  27  may be distributed processing, parallel processing and the like. To that end a plurality of networked computers may form host server  27 . Certain data structures are disclosed as preferred embodiments, various other data structures besides definition tables  83 ,  87 ,  35  and programming objects  67 ,  81  may be employed.