Skip to main content

Nonmonotonic Commitment Machines

  • Conference paper
Book cover Advances in Agent Communication (ACL 2003)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2922))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Protocols for multiagent interaction need to be flexible because of the open and dynamic nature of multiagent systems. Such protocols cannot be modeled adequately via finite state machines (FSMs) as FSM representations lead to rigid protocols. We propose a commitment-based formalism called Nonmonotonic Commitment Machines (NCMs) for representing multiagent interaction protocols. In this approach, we give semantics to states and actions in a protocol in terms of commitments. Protocols represented as NCMs afford the agent flexibility in interactions with other agents. In particular, situations in protocols when nonmonotonic reasoning is required can be efficiently represented in NCMs.

We are grateful to the anonymous referees for their useful comments. We would like to thank Ashok Mallya and Pinar Yolum for the helpful discussions. This work is supported by the National Science Foundation under grant DST-0139037.

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. Smith, R.G.: The contract net protocol: High-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Transactions on Computers 29, 1104–1113 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cox, B., Tygar, J., Sirbu, M.: Netbill security and transaction protocol. In: Proceedings of the First USENIXWorkshop on Electronic Commerce, pp. 77–88 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Giunchiglia, E., Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., McCain, N., Turner, H.: Nonmonotonic causal theories. Artificial Intelligence (2003) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Commitment machines. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) ATAL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2333, pp. 235–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. McCarthy, J.: Elaboration tolerance. In progress (1999), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/elaboration.html

  6. Lifschitz, V.: Missionaries and cannibals in the causal calculator. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 85–96 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bratman, M.E.: Shared cooperative activity. The Philosophical Review 101, 327–341 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Shoham, Y.: Agent-oriented programming. Artificial Intelligence 60, 51–92 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Grosz, B.J., Kraus, S.: Collaborative plans for complex group action. Artificial Intelligence 86, 269–357 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Castelfranchi, C.: Commitments: From individual intentions to groups and organizations. In: Proceedings of the AAAI 1993 Workshop on AI and Theories of Groups and Organizations: Conceptual and Empirical Research (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Krogh, C.: Obligations in multiagent systems. In: Åmodt, A., Komorowski, J. (eds.) Scandinavian Artificial Intelligence Conference 1995 (SCAI 1995), Trondheim, pp. 19–30 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. 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 

  13. Singh, M.P.: A social semantics for agent communication languages. In: Proceedings of the 1999 IJCAI Workshop on Agent Communication Languages, Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Harel, D., Kozen, D., Tiuryn, J.: Dynamic Logic. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Kowalski, R., Sergot, M.: Logic-based calculus of events. New Generation Computing 4, 67–95 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McCarthy, J.: Situations, actions and causal laws. TR, Stanford University (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Girault, C., Valk, R.: Petri Nets for System Engineering (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Harel, D.: Statecharts: A visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming 8, 231–274 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Jennings, N.R.: Commitments and conventions: The foundation of coordination in multiagent systems. Knowledge Engineering Review 2, 223–250 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sandholm, T., Lesser, V.: Issues in automated negotiation and electronic commerce: Extending the contract net framework. In: [?], pp. 66–73 (1998) (Reprinted from Proceedings of the International Conference on Multiagent Systems, 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Flexible protocol specification and execution: Applying event calculus planning using commitments. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 527–534. ACM Press, New York (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Koning, J.L., Huget, M.P.: A semi-formal specification language dedicated to interaction protocols. In: Kangassalo, H., Jaakkola, H., Kawaguchi, E. (eds.) Information Modeling and Knowledge Bases XII, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press, Amsterdam (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Singh, M.P.: Agent communication languages: Rethinking the principles. IEEE Computer 31, 40–47 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sadek, D.: Compliance in Arcol, Personal communication (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Finin, T., Fritzson, R., McKay, D., McEntire, R.: KQML as an agent communication language. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 456–463. ACM Press, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Dignum, F., van Linder, B.: Modelling social agents: Towards deliberate communication. In: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, pp. 357–380. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Guerin, F., Pitt, J.: Denotational semantics for agent communication languages. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pp. 497–504. ACM Press, New York (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Holzmann, G.J.: Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice-Hall, London (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  29. W3C: Business process execution language for web services, version 1.1 (2003), http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-bpel/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chopra, A., Singh, M.P. (2004). Nonmonotonic Commitment Machines. In: Dignum, F. (eds) Advances in Agent Communication. ACL 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2922. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24608-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24608-4_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20769-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-24608-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics