2003
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-36540-0_1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Specifying Electronic Societies with the Causal Calculator

Abstract: Abstract. In previous work [1] we presented a framework for the specification of open computational societies i.e. societies where the behaviour of the members and their interactions cannot be predicted in advance. We viewed computational systems from an external perspective, with a focus on the institutional and the social aspects of these systems. The social constraints and roles of the open societies were specified with the use of the Event Calculus. In this paper, we formalise our framework with the use of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Their approach of dealing with contract is similar to ours but with some important differences with respect to the broader picture of multi-institutions: (i) any formalisation of pow/permissions/obligation is ommitted from their specification and left as domain dependent concepts which are modelled using XML (ii) this means that that their approach does not have conventional generation of events/obligations/permissions explicitly, only their effects (iii) in their work the authors are just concerned with monitoring the state, not investigating other properties (i.e. planning/verificaition), although these may also be possible Artikis et al in [1,2,13] describe a system for the specification of normative social systems in terms of power, empowerment and obligation. This is formalized using both the event calculus [14] and a subset of the action language C+ [6].…”
Section: Discussion and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their approach of dealing with contract is similar to ours but with some important differences with respect to the broader picture of multi-institutions: (i) any formalisation of pow/permissions/obligation is ommitted from their specification and left as domain dependent concepts which are modelled using XML (ii) this means that that their approach does not have conventional generation of events/obligations/permissions explicitly, only their effects (iii) in their work the authors are just concerned with monitoring the state, not investigating other properties (i.e. planning/verificaition), although these may also be possible Artikis et al in [1,2,13] describe a system for the specification of normative social systems in terms of power, empowerment and obligation. This is formalized using both the event calculus [14] and a subset of the action language C+ [6].…”
Section: Discussion and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The types of specification we describe are closely related to the work of Artikis et al described in [1][2][3]21] from which we derive much of our specification model. In their work specifications of social systems are formalised in both the event calculus [22] and using a subset of the action language · [12].…”
Section: Discussion and Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In both the physical and the virtual worlds, and the emerging combination of the two, the arguments in favour centre on the minimisation of disruptive behaviour and supporting the achievement of the goals for which the normative framework has been conceived and thus also the motivation for submission to its governance by the participants. While the concept remains attractive, its realisation in a computational setting remains a subject for research, with a wide range of existing logics [29,1,7,9,32] and tools [26,14,19].…”
Section: Normative Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%