Using a performative subsumption lattice to support commitment-based conversations

Kremer, Rob; Flores, Roberto A.

doi:10.1145/1082473.1082491

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The work of Kremer and Flores (e.g. [8]) also uses commitments, and deals with implementation. However, they provide infrastructure support (CASA) rather than a programming language, and do not appear to provide assistance to a programmer seeking to implement agents.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recognising these limitations of the traditional approach to designing agent interactions, a number of approaches have been proposed in recent years that move away from message-centric interaction protocols, and instead consider designing agent interactions using higher-level concepts such as social commitments [8,10,18] or interaction goals [2]. There has also been work on richer forms of interaction in specific settings, such as teams of cooperative agents [5,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implementing commitment-based interactions

Winikoff

2007

Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although agent interaction plays a vital role in MAS, and messagecentric approaches to agent interaction have their drawbacks, present agent-oriented programming languages do not provide support for implementing agent interaction that is flexible and robust. Instead, messages are provided as a primitive building block. In this paper we consider one approach for modelling agent interactions: the commitment machines framework. This framework supports modelling interactions at a higher level (using social commitments), resulting in more flexible interactions. We investigate how commitmentbased interactions can be implemented in conventional agent-oriented programming languages. The contributions of this paper are: a mapping from a commitment machine to a collection of BDI-style plans; extensions to the semantics of BDI programming languages; and an examination of two issues that arise when distributing commitment machines (turn management and race conditions) and solutions to these problems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing commitment-based interactions

Winikoff

2007

Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[62,35,11,58,59,13]). What these approaches all have in common is that although they ultimately do realise communication by sending messages, the interaction is specified and implemented in terms of higher level constructs, and certain errors simply cannot occur as a result of this.…”

Section: "Send Considered Harmful?"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assurance of Agent Systems: What Role Should Formal Verification Play?

Winikoff

2010

Specification and Verification of Multi-Agent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Department of Information Science is one of seven departments that make up the School of Business at the University of Otago. The department offers courses of study leading to a major in Information Science within the BCom, BA and BSc degrees. In addition to undergraduate teaching, the department is also strongly involved in postgraduate research programmes leading to MCom, MA, MSc and PhD degrees. Research projects in spatial information processing, connectionist-based information systems, software engineering and software development, information engineering and database, software metrics, distributed information systems, multimedia information systems and information systems security are particularly well supported.The views expressed in this paper are not necessarily those of the department as a whole. The accuracy of the information presented in this paper is the sole responsibility of the authors. CopyrightCopyright remains with the authors. Permission to copy for research or teaching purposes is granted on the condition that the authors and the Series are given due acknowledgment. Reproduction in any form for purposes other than research or teaching is forbidden unless prior written permission has been obtained from the authors. CorrespondenceThis paper represents work to date and may not necessarily form the basis for the authors' final conclusions relating to this topic. It is likely, however, that the paper will appear in some form in a journal or in conference proceedings in the near future. The authors would be pleased to receive correspondence in connection with any of the issues raised in this paper, or for subsequent publication details. Please write directly to the authors at the address provided below. (Details of final journal/conference publication venues for these papers are also provided on the Department's publications web pages: http://www.otago.ac.nz/informationscience/pubs/). Any other correspondence concerning the Series should be sent to the DPS Coordinator. AbstractIn this paper we consider the broader issue of gaining assurance that an agent system will behave appropriately when it is deployed. We ask to what extent this problem is addressed by existing research into formal verification. We identify a range of issues with existing work which leads us to conclude that, broadly speaking, verification approaches on their own are too narrowly focussed. We argue that a shift in direction is needed, and outline some possibilities for such a shift in direction.

show abstract

“…Interestingly, the conjunction of authorizations and the definition of messages as declarations allows utterances to affect the state of commitments without an explicit agreement. That is, by accepting to participate in an activity, agents surrender part of their autonomy and agree that certain messages could immediately affect their commitment stores (note that whether an acceptance could or could not be redundant in such cases should be based on the aggregated meaning of messages [11]). Extending our model to account for institutions is part of our future work.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversational semantics sustained by commitments

Flores

Pasquier

Chaib-draa

2006

Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose an operational model that combines message meaning and conversational structure in one comprehensive approach. Our long-term research goal is to lay down principles uniting message meaning and conversational structure while providing an operational foundation that could be implemented in open computer systems. In this paper we explore our advances in one aspect of meaning that in theories of language use is known as "signal meaning", and propose a layered model in which the meaning of messages can be defined according to their fitness to advance the state of joint activities. Messages in our model are defined in terms of social commitments, which have been shown to entice conversational structure.

show abstract

Using a performative subsumption lattice to support commitment-based conversations

Cited by 5 publications

References 8 publications

Implementing commitment-based interactions

Implementing commitment-based interactions

Assurance of Agent Systems: What Role Should Formal Verification Play?

Conversational semantics sustained by commitments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About