Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Executable specifications of resource-bounded agents

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Logical theories of intelligent (or rational) agents have been refined and improved over the past 20 years of research. Such logical theories are used in many ways, one of which is as the basis for executable agent specifications. Here, agents are specified using a logical description and then this description is directly executed in order to implement the agent’s behaviour. This provides strong correctness results for the implemented agent, directly corresponding the formal specification with the implementation. With increased application, it has become clear that such specifications of idealised agents are inappropriate in practical situations. An agent may have many resource-bounds to contend with, both in terms of time and memory, and this should be taken into account within the agent’s formal specification. Thus, in this paper, we tackle the problem of representing and executing resource-bounded agents. The framework developed here allows the restriction of the amount of reasoning, both temporal and doxastic, that the agent is permitted. We address the formal properties of the framework, present results concerning the execution of such specifications, and consider the practical outcome of such restrictions.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albore, A., Alechina, N., Bertoli, P., Ghidini, C., Logan, B., & Serafini L. (2006). Model-checking memory requirements of resource-bounded reasoners. In Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). Menlo Park: AAAI Press.

  2. Alechina N., Jago, M., Bertoli, P., Logan, B., Ghidini, C., & Serafini, L. (2006). Verifying space and time requirements for resource-bounded agents. In Proceedings of 5th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) (pp. 217–219). ACM.

  3. Barringer H., Fisher M., Gabbay D., Gough G., Owens R. (1995) MetateM: An introduction. Formal Aspects of Computing 7(5): 533–549

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., Owens, R., Reynolds, M. (eds) (1996) The imperative future: Principles of executable temporal logics. Research Studies Press, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  5. Blackburn P., de Rijke M. (1997) Why combine logics?. Studia Logica 59: 5–27

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. de Boer F. S., Hindriks K. V., van der Hoek W., Meyer J. J. C. (2007) A verification framework for agent programming with declarative goals. Journal of Applied Logic 5(2): 277–302

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., El Fallah Seghrouchni, A. (eds) (2005) Multi-agent programming: Languages, platforms and applications. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Bordini, R. H., Hübner, J. F., & Vieira, R. Jason and the golden fleece of agent-oriented programming. In Bordini et al. [7] (Chap. 1, pp. 3–37).

  9. Bordini R. H., Hübner J. F., Wooldridge M. (2007) Programming multi-agent systems in AgentSpeak using Jason. Wiley, London

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Bosse T., Jonker C., van der Meij L., Treur J. (2007) A language and environment for analysis of dynamics by simulation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools 16: 435–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bratman M. E., Israel D. J., Pollack M. E. (1988) Plans and resource-bounded practical reasoning. Computational Intelligence 4(4): 349–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bussmann, S., & Schild, K. (2000). Self-organizing manufacturing control: An industrial application of agent technology. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Multi-agent Systems (pp. 87–94). Boston, MA.

  13. Calisti M., Funk P., Biellman S., Bugnon T. (2004) A multi-agent system for organ transplant management. In: Moreno A., Nealon J. (eds) Applications of software agent technology in the HealthCare domain. Birkhäuser Verla, Boston, pp 199–212

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dastani, M., de Boer, F., Dignum, F., & Meyer, J. (2003). Programming agent deliberation: An approach illustrated using the 3APL language. In Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMSA) (pp. 97–104).

  15. Dastani, M., van Riemsdijk, M. B., & Meyer, J. J. C. Programming multi-agent systems in 3APL. In Bordini et al. [7], (Chap. 2, pp. 39–67).

  16. Dennis L. A., Farwer B. (2008) Gwendolen: A BDI language for verifiable agents. In: Löwe B. (eds) Logic and the simulation of interaction and reasoning. AISB, Aberdeen AISB’08 Workshop

    Google Scholar 

  17. Emerson E. A. (1990) Temporal and modal logic. In: Leeuwen J. (eds) Handbook of theoretical computer science. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 996–1072

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fisher M. (1995) Representing and executing agent-based systems. In: Wooldridge M., Jennings N. R. (eds) Intelligent agents. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fisher M. (1997) A normal form for temporal logic and its application in theorem-proving and execution. Journal of Logic and Computation 7(4): 429–456

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Fisher, M. (1997). Implementing BDI-like systems by direct execution. In Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) (pp. 316–321). Morgan-Kaufmann.

  21. Fisher, M. (2006). MetateM: The story so far. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Programming Multiagent Systems (ProMAS-03), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 3862. Springer.

  22. Fisher, M. (2008). Agent deliberation in an executable temporal framework. Technical Report ULCS-08-014, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, UK.

  23. Fisher, M., & Ghidini, C. (1999). Programming resource-bounded deliberative agents. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’99) (pp. 200–206). Morgan Kaufmann Publications, Inc.

  24. Fisher, M., & Ghidini, C. (2000). Agents playing with dynamic resource bounds. In ECAI workshop on balancing reactivity and social deliberation in multi-agent systems. Germany: Berlin.

  25. Fisher, M., & Ghidini, C. (2000). Specifying and implementing agents with dynamic resource bounds. In Proceedings of ECAI-2000 Workshop on Cognitive Robotics.

  26. Fisher, M., & Ghidini, C.: Agents with bounded temporal resources. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2403, 169–184 (2002)

  27. Fisher M., Ghidini C. (2009) Exploring the future with resource-bounded agents. Journal of Logic Language and Information 18(1): 3–21

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Gabbay D., Kurucz A., Wolter F., Zakharyaschev M. (2003) Many-dimensional modal logics: Theory and applications. No. 148 in studies in logic and the foundations of mathematics. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ghidini, C. (1999). Modelling (un)bounded beliefs. In Proceedings of Second International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context (CONTEXT). Trento, Italy.

  30. Ghidini C., Giunchiglia F. (2001) Local models semantics, or contextual reasoning = locality + compatibility. Artificial Intelligence 127(4): 221–259

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Giacomo G. D., Lespérance Y., Levesque H. (2000) Congolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus. Artificial Intelligence 121(1–2): 109–169

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Giunchiglia, F., & Serafini, L. (1994). Multilanguage hierarchical logics (or: how we can do without modal logics). Artificial Intelligence, 65, 29–70 Also IRST-Technical Report 9110-07, IRST, Trento, Italy.

  33. Glushko R.J., Tenenbaum J.M., Meltzer B. (1999) An XML Framework for agent-based E-commerce. Communications of the ACM 42(3): 106–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hindriks, K., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., & Meyer, J. J. (1998). Formal semantics for an abstract agent programming language. In Intelligent Agents IV: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures and Languages, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, (Vol. 1365, pp. 215–229). Springer

  35. Hindriks, K., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., & Meyer, J. J. (2001). Agent programming with declarative goals. In Intelligent Agents VII—Proceedings of 6th International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, (Vol. 1986, pp. 228–243). Springer.

  36. Huhns M. N. (2002) Agents as web services. IEEE Internet Computing 6(4): 93–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Klein, G., Suna, A., & Seghrouchni, A. E. F. (2004). Resource sharing and load balancing based on agent mobility. In Proceedings of International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, (pp. 350–355). ICEIS Press.

  38. Kracht M., Wolter F. (1991) Properties of independently axiomatizable bimodal logics. Journal of Symbolic Logic 56(4): 1469–1485

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Levesque H., Reiter R., Lespérance Y., Lin F., Scherl R. (1997) GOLOG: A logic programming language for dynamic domains. Journal of Logic Programming 31: 59–84

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. van Linder B., van der Hoek W., Meyer J. J. C. (1998) Formalising abilities and opportunities of agents. Fundamentae Informaticae 34(1–2): 53–101

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Meyer J. J., van der Hoek W., van Linder B. (1999) A logical approach to the dynamics of commitments. Artificial Intelligence 113(1–2): 1–40

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  42. Muscettola N., Nayak P. P., Pell B., Williams B. (1998) Remote agent: To boldly go where no AI system has gone before. Artificial Intelligence 103(1–2): 5–48

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Paulussen T., Zöller A., Heinzl A., Pokahr A., Braubach L., Lamersdorf W. (2004) Dynamic patient scheduling in hospitals, in coordination and agent technology in value networks. GITO, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  44. Pnueli, A. (1977). The temporal logic of programs. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science. Providence, USA.

  45. Pokahr, A., Braubach, L., & Lamersdorf, W. Jadex: A BDI Reasoning Engine. In Bordini et al. [7], (pp. 149–174).

  46. Rao, A. (1996). AgentSpeak(L): BDI agents speak out in a logical computable language. In Proceedings of 7th European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-agent World (MAAMAW), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (Vol. 1038, pp. 42–55). Springer.

  47. Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. (1995). BDI Agents: from theory to practice. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-agent Systems (ICMAS-95), (pp. 312–319). San Francisco, CA.

  48. Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. P. (1992). An abstract architecture for rational agents. In Proceedings of International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR) (pp. 439–449). Morgan Kaufmann.

  49. van Riemsdijk, B., van der Hoek, W., & Meyer, J. J. (2003). Agent programming in dribble: From beliefs to goals with plans. In Proceedings of 2nd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) (pp. 393–400).

  50. Seghrouchni, A. E. F., & Suna, A. (2004). Claim: A computational language for autonomous, intelligent and mobile agents. In M. Dastani, J. Dix, & A. E. F. Seghrouchni (Eds.), Programming multiagent systems, first international workshop (ProMAS’03), LNCS (Vol. 3067, pp. 90–110). Berlin: Springer.

  51. Winikoff, M. (2007). Implementing commitment-based interactions. In Proceedings of 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) (pp. 1–8). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

  52. Winikoff, M., Padgham, L., Harland, J., & Thangarajah, J. (2002). Declarative and procedural goals in intelligent agent systems. In Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR).

  53. Wooldridge M. (2000) Reasoning about rational agents. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Wooldridge M. (2002) An introduction to multiagent systems. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  55. Wooldridge M., Dixon C., Fisher M. (1998) A tableau-based proof method for temporal logics of knowledge and belief. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 8(3): 225–258

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3BX, UK

    Michael Fisher

  2. Data and Knowledge Management Group (DKM), FBK-irst, 38050, Trento, Italy

    Chiara Ghidini

Authors
  1. Michael Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chiara Ghidini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Fisher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fisher, M., Ghidini, C. Executable specifications of resource-bounded agents. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 21, 368–396 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9105-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9105-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation