Skip to main content

Modelling Flexible Social Commitments and Their Enforcement

  • Conference paper
Engineering Societies in the Agents World V (ESAW 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 3451))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

For over a decade, agent research has shown that social commitments support the definition of open multiagent systems by capturing the responsibilities that agents contract toward one another through their communications. These systems, however, rely on the assumption that agents respect the social commitments they adopt. To overcome this limitation, in this paper we investigate the role of sanctions as elements whose enforcement fosters agents’ compliance with adopted commitments. In particular, we present a model of flexible social commitments to which sanctions are attached, and where the enforcement of sanctions act as a social control mechanism for the satisfaction of commitments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Hewitt, C.: Open information systems semantics for distributed artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 47, 76–106 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Castelfranchi, C.: Commitments: from individual intentions to groups and organizations. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS 1995), San Francisco, CA, pp. 41–48 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Singh, M.P.: A social semantics for agent communication languages. In: Dignum, F.P.M., Greaves, M. (eds.) Issues in Agent Communication. LNCS, vol. 1916, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Flores, R., Kremer, R.: Bringing coherence to agent conversation. In: Wooldridge, M.J., Weiß, G., Ciancarini, P. (eds.) AOSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2222, pp. 50–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. McBurney, P., Parson, S.: Agent ludens: games for agent dialogues. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pasquier, P., Bergeron, M., Chaib-draa, B.: DIAGAL: A generic ACL for open systems. In: Gleizes, M.-P., Omicini, A., Zambonelli, F. (eds.) ESAW 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3451, pp. 152–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Defining interaction protocols using a commitment-based agent communication langage. In: Rosenchein, J.S., Sandholm, T., Wooldridge, M., Yokoo, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the second Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agents Systems conference (AAMAS 2003), pp. 520–527. ACM Press, New York (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Pasquier, P., Chaib-draa, B.: The cognitive coherence approach for agent communication pragmatics. In: Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Autonomous Agent and Multi-Agents Sytems (AAMAS 03), pp. 544–552. ACM Press, New York (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Flores, R., Kremer, R.C.: A principled modular approach to construct flexible conversation protocols. In: Tawfik, A.Y., Goodwin, S.D. (eds.) Canadian AI 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3060, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Flexible protocol specification and execution: Applying event calculus planning using commitments. In: Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), Bologna, Italy, pp. 527–534 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Excelente-Toledo, C.B., Bourne, R.A., Jennings, N.R.: Reasoning about commitments and penalties for coordination between autonomous agents. In: Müller, J., Andre, E., Sen, S., Frasson, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pp. 131–138. ACM Press, New York (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Dignum, F., Kinny, D., Sonenberg, L.: From desires, obligations and norms to goals. Cognitive Science Quarterly 2, 407–430 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sandholm, T.W., Lesser, V.R.: Advantages of a leveled commitment contracting protocol. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Portland, OR (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vogel Carey, T.: How to confuse commitment with obligation. The Journal of Philosophy, 276–284 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Martindale, D.: The theory of social control. In: Roucek, J. (ed.) Social Control for the 1980s: A Handbook for Order in a Democratic Society, pp. 46–58. Greenwood Press, Westport (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hechter, M., Opp, K.D.: Introduction. In: Hechter, M., Opp, K.D. (eds.) Social Norms, vol. xi–xx. Russell Sage Foundation, Thousand Oaks (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Levinson, D.J.: Collective sanctions. Public law research paper no. 57, NYU Law School, Ctr for Law and Business Research (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Posner, R.A., Rasmusen, E.B.: Creating and enforcing norms, with special reference to sanctions. International Review of Law and Economics 19, 369–382 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bates, J.: The role of emotion in believable agents. Communications of the ACM 37, 122–125 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vold, G.B., Bernard, T.J., Snipes, J.B.: Theoretical Criminology, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Beccaria, C.: On Crimes and Punishments. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bentham, J.: An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. The Athlone Press, London (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Polinsky, M., Shavel, S.: Punitive damages. In: Newman, P. (ed.) The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and The Law, vol. 3, pp. 192–198. Macmillan Reference Limited, London (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Singh, M.P.: An ontology for commitments in multiagent systems: Toward a unification of normative concepts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7, 97–113 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Artikis, A.: Executable Specification of Open Norm-Governed Computational Systems. PhD thesis, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London (2003)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pasquier, P., Flores, R.A., Chaib-draa, B. (2005). Modelling Flexible Social Commitments and Their Enforcement. In: Gleizes, MP., Omicini, A., Zambonelli, F. (eds) Engineering Societies in the Agents World V. ESAW 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3451. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11423355_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11423355_10

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-27330-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31887-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics