Abstract
In order to provide flexible control over agent communication, we propose an integrated approach that involves using positive and negative permissions and obligations to describe both conversation specifications and policies. Conversation specifications are described in terms of the speech acts that an agent can/cannot/must/must not perform based on the sequence of messages received and sent. On the other hand, conversation policies restrict how the specifications are used and are defined over the attributes of the sender, receiver, message content, and context in general. Other policies like management, social, privacy etc. are defined at a higher level of abstraction and restrict the general behavior of agents. Whenever they deal with communication, the higher level policies are translated into conversation policies using the syntax and semantics of the specific communication language being used. Agents use a policy engine for reasoning over conversation specifications and applicable policies in order to decide what communicative act to perform next. Our work is different from existing research in communication policies because it is not tightly coupled to any domain information such as mental states of agents or specific communicative acts.The main contributions of this work include (i) an extensible framework that can support varied domain knowledge and different agent communication languages, and (ii) the declarative representation of conversation specifications and policies in terms of permitted and obligated speech acts.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Flores, R., Kremer, R.: A Model for Flexible Composition of Conversations: How a Simple Conversation got so Complicated. In: Huget, M.P., Dignum, F., Koning, J.L. (eds.) 3rd Workshop on Agent Communication Languages and Conversation Policies. First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Bologna, Italy, July 15-19 (2002)
Greaves, M., Holmback, H., Bradshaw, J.: What is a conversation policy? In: Autonomous Agents 1999 Workshop on Specifying and Implementing Conversation Policies (1999)
Phillips, L.R., Link, H.E.: The Role of Conversation Policy in Carrying Out Agent Conversations. LNCS, vol. 1916, pp. 132–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Kagal, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A.: Declarative Policies for Describing Web Service Capabilities and Constraints. In: W3C Workshop on Constraints and Capabilities for Web Services, W3C. Oracle Conference Center, Redwood Shores (2004)
FIPA: Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents Specifications, http://www.fipa.org
Cable News Network (CNN): Probe under way on Medicare cost (2004), http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/17/medicare.investigation/
W3C: OWL Web Ontology Language (2004), http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/
Moffett, J., Sloman, M.: Policy Conflict Analysis in Distributed Systems Management. Journal of Organizational Computing (1993)
Labrou, Y., Finin, T.: A semantics approach for KQML – a general purpose communication language for software agents. In: Third International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM 1994 (1994)
Kagal, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A.: A Policy Language for Pervasive Systems. In: Fourth IEEE International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (2003)
Kagal, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A.: A Policy Based Approach to Security for the Semantic Web. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 402–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Lupu, E.C., Sloman, M.: Conflicts in Policy-Based Distributed Systems Management. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (1999)
Lupu, E.C., Sloman, M.: Towards a Role Based Framework for Distributed Systems Management. In: Journal of Networks and Systemss Management. Plenum Press, New York (1996)
Zou, Y., Chan, H., Finin, T.: F-OWL: an Inference Engine for Semantic Web. In: Hinchey, M.G., Rash, J.L., Truszkowski, W.F., Rouff, C.A. (eds.) FAABS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3228, pp. 238–248. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Intention is choice with commitment. In: Artificial Intelligence (1990)
Singh, M.: Towards a formal theory of communication for multiagent systems. In: International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1991)
Singh, M.: A semantics for speech acts. In: Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence (1992)
Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Defining interaction protocols using a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 520–527. ACM Press, New York (2003)
Cost, R.S., Chen, Y., Finin, T.W., Labrou, Y., Peng, Y.: Using Colored Petri Nets for Conversation Modeling. In: Dignum, F., Greaves, M. (eds.) Agent Communication Languages. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1916, pp. 178–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)
Kollingbaum, M.J., Norman, T.: Norm consistency in practical reasoning agents (2003)
Broersen, J., Dastani, M., Hulstijn, J., Huang, Z., van der Torre, L.: The BOID Architecture Conflicts Between Beliefs, Obligations, Intentions and Desire (2001)
Mallya, A.U., Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Resolving Commitments Among Autonomous Agents. In: Dignum, F.P.M. (ed.) ACL 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2922, pp. 166–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kagal, L., Finin, T. (2005). Modeling Communicative Behavior Using Permissions and Obligations. In: van Eijk, R.M., Huget, MP., Dignum, F. (eds) Agent Communication. AC 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3396. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32258-0_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32258-0_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-25015-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32258-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)