Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Plans, Actions and Dialogues Using Linear Logic

  • Published:
Journal of Logic, Language and Information Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We describe how Intuitionistic Linear Logic can be used to provide a unified logical account for agents to find and execute plans. This account supports the modelling of agent interaction, including dialogue; allows agents to be robust to unexpected events and failures; and supports significant reuse of agent specifications. The framework has been implemented and several case studies have been considered. Further applications include human–computer interfaces as well as agent interaction in the semantic web.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramsky S. (1993) Computational interpretations of Linear Logic. Theoretical Computer Science 111(1–2): 3–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alice. (2007). The Alice manual, 1.4 edn. Programming System Lab, Saarland University. http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/alice/manual.

  • Austin J.A. (1962) How to do things with words. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, A. (1997). Linear type theories, semantics and action calculi. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.

  • Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001). The semantic web. Scientific American.

  • Cervesato I., Hodas J.S., Pfenning F. (2000) Efficient resource management for Linear Logic proof search. Theoretical Computer Science 232(1–2): 133–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu-Carroll J., Carberry S. (1998) Collaborative response generation in planning dialogues. Computational Linguistics 24(3): 355–400

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu-Carroll J., Carberry S. (2000) Conflict resolution in collaborative planning dialogs. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 53(6): 969–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen P.R., Perrault C.R. (1979) Elements of a plan-based theory of speech acts. Cognitive Science 3: 177–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell, S. (2001). Deductive synthesis of recursive plans in Linear Logic. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.

  • Cresswell, S., Smaill, A., & Richardson, J. D. C. (1999). Deductive synthesis of recursive plans in Linear Logic. In Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Planning, Durham, UK, LNAI, Vol. 1809.

  • Decker S., Goble C.A., Hendler J.A., Ishida T., Studer R. (2003) A new journal for a new era of the World Wide Web. Journal of Web Semantics 1(1): 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, L., Bundy, A., & Smaill, A. (2006). Planning as deductive synthesis in intuitionistic Linear Logic. Technical Report EDI-INF-RR-0786, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh.

  • Fernández R., Endriss U. (2007) Abstract models for dialogue protocols. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 16(2): 121–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, M. E., By, T., Rickert, M., & Knoll, A. (2006). Human-robot dialogue for joint construction tasks. In ICMI ’06: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Multimodal interfaces, Banff, Alberta, pp. 68–71.

  • Girard J.-Y. (1987) Linear Logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50: 1–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girard, J.-Y. (1995). Linear Logic: Its syntax and semantics. In J.-Y. Girard, Y. Lafont & L. Regnier (Eds.), Advances in Linear Logic, No. 222 in London Mathematical Society Lecture Notes Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Greenfield P.M. (1991) Language, tools, and brain: The ontogeny and phylogeny of hierarchically organized sequential behavior. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14(4): 531–551

    Google Scholar 

  • Harland J., Pym D.J. (2003) Resource-distribution via Boolean constraints. ACM Transactions on Computatonal Logic 4(1): 56–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harland J., Winikoff M. (2004) Agents via mixed-mode computation in Linear Logic. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 42(1–3): 167–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodas, J. S., & Miller, D. (1991). Logic programming in a fragment of intuitionistic Linear Logic. In Proceedings 6th IEEE Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 15–18 July 1991. New York: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 32–42.

  • Horrocks, I., & Sattler, U. (2005). A tableaux decision procedure for SHOIQ. In Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2005), pp. 448–453.

  • Kopylov, A. P. (1995). Decidability of linear affine logic. In D. Kozen (Ed.), Tenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, San Diego, California, pp. 496–504.

  • Kraft, D., Başeski, E., Popović, M., Batog, A., Kjær-Nielsen, A., Krüger, N., et al. (2008). Exploration and planning in a three-level cognitive architecture. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Cognitive Systems (CogSys 2008).

  • Küngas, P., & Matskin, M. (2004). Symbolic negotiation with Linear Logic. In J. Dix & J. A. Leite (Eds.), CLIMA IV, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3259, pp. 71–88.

  • Larsson D., Traum D.R. (2000) Information state and dialogue management in the TRINDI dialogue move engine toolkit. Natural Language Engineering 6: 323–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • López, P., & Polakow, J. (2004). Implementing efficient resource management for Linear Logic Programming. In F. Baader & A. Voronkov (Eds.), LPAR, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3452, pp. 528–543.

  • Masseron M. (1993) Generating plans in linear logic II: A geometry of conjunctive actions. Theoretical Computer Science 113: 371–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy J., Hayes P. (1969) Some philsophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In: Meltzer B., Michie D.(eds) Machine Intelligence (Vol. 4). Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinnis, J., Robertson, D., & Walton, C. (2005). Protocol synthesis with dialogue structure theory. In AAMAS ’05: Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, New York, NY, USA, pp. 1329–1330.

  • McNeill F., Bundy A. (2007) Dynamic, automatic, first-order ontology repair by diagnosis of failed plan execution. International Journal on Semantic Web and information systems 3(3): 1–35 (Special issue on ontology matching)

    Google Scholar 

  • Osman, N., & Robertson, D. (2007). Dynamic verification of trust in distributed open systems. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’07), pp. 1440–1445.

  • Petrick, R. P. A., & Bacchus, F. (2002). A knowledge-based approach to planning with incomplete information and sensing. In M. Ghallab, J. Hertzberg, & P. Traverso (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling (AIPS-2002), Menlo Park, CA, pp. 212–221.

  • Petrick, R. P. A., & Bacchus, F. (2004). Extending the knowledge-based approach to planning with incomplete information and sensing. In S. Zilberstein, J. Koehler, & S. Koenig (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS-04), Menlo Park, CA, pp. 2–11.

  • Power R. (1979) The organization of purposeful dialogs. Linguistics 17: 105–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. P. (1995). BDI-agents: From theory to practice. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiagent Systems, San Francisco.

  • Robertson, D. (2004). A lightweight coordination calculus for agent systems. In J. A. Leite, A. Omicini, P. Torroni & P. Yolum (Eds.), DALT, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3476, pp. 183–197.

  • Russell S., Norvig P. (2002) Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (2nd ed). Prentice-Hall International, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff E.A., Sacks H. (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica 8(4): 289–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steedman M. (1997) Temporality. In: Benthem J.F.A.K., ter Meulen G.B.A.(eds) Handbook of logic and language. Elsevier, NorthHolland, pp 895–935

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steedman M. (2002) Plans, affordances, and combinatory grammar. Linguistics and Philosophy 25(5–6): 723–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, M., & Petrick, R. (2007). Planning dialog actions. In Proceedings of the 8th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue (SIGdial 2007), pp. 265–272.

  • Steel G. (2006) Formal analysis of PIN block attacks. Theoretical Computer Science 367(1–2): 257–270 (Special issue on automated reasoning for security protocol analysis)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sycara K., Klusch M., Widoff S., Lu J. (1999) Dynamic service matchmaking among agents in open information environments. SIGMOD Record 28(1): 47–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takeda H. (2004) Semantic web: A road to the knowledge infrastructure on the internet. New Generation Computing 22(4): 395–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traum, D. R., & Allen, J. F. (1994). Discourse obligations in dialogue processing. In J. Pustejovsky (Ed.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, San Francisco, pp. 1–8.

  • Willmott, S., Pena, F. O. F., Merida-Campos, C., Constantinescu, I., Dale, J., & Cabanillas, D. (2005). Adapting agent communication languages for semantic web service inter-communication. In WI ’05: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 405–408.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Lucas Dixon, Alan Smaill & Tracy Tsang

Authors
  1. Lucas Dixon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alan Smaill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tracy Tsang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucas Dixon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dixon, L., Smaill, A. & Tsang, T. Plans, Actions and Dialogues Using Linear Logic. J of Log Lang and Inf 18, 251–289 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-008-9079-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-008-9079-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation