A Compositional Semantics of Plan Revision in Intelligent Agents

  • M. Birna van Riemsdijk
  • John-Jules Ch. Meyer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4019)


This paper revolves around the so-called plan revision rules of the agent programming language 3APL. These rules can be viewed as a generalization of procedures. This generalization however results in the semantics of programs of the 3APL language no longer being compositional. This gives rise to problems when trying to define a proof system for the language. In this paper we define a restricted version of plan revision rules which extends procedures, but which does have a compositional semantics, as we will formally show.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wooldridge, M.: Agent-based software engineering. IEEE Proceedings Software Engineering 144(1), 26–37 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wooldridge, M., Ciancarini, P.: Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: The State of the Art. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1957, pp. 1–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bratman, M.E.: Intention, plans, and practical reason. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In: Allen, J., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1991), pp. 473–484. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42, 213–261 (1990)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hindriks, K.V., de Boer, F.S., van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.J.Ch.: Agent programming in 3APL. Int. J. of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2(4), 357–401 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dastani, M., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.Ch.: A programming language for cognitive agents: goal directed 3APL. In: Programming multiagent systems, first international workshop (ProMAS 2003). LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3067, pp. 111–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Bakker, J.: Mathematical Theory of Program Correctness. Series in Computer Science. Prentice-Hall International, London (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giacomo, G.d., Lespérance, Y., Levesque, H.: ConGolog, a Concurrent Programming Language Based on the Situation Calculus. Artificial Intelligence 121(1-2), 109–169 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rao, A.S.: AgentSpeak(L): BDI agents speak out in a logical computable language. In: van der Velde, W., Perram, J. (eds.) MAAMAW 1996. LNCS, vol. 1038, pp. 42–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shoham, Y.: Agent-oriented programming. Artificial Intelligence 60, 51–92 (1993)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., de Boer, F.S., Meyer, J.J.Ch.: Dynamic logic for plan revision in intelligent agents. In: Leite, J.A., Torroni, P. (eds.) CLIMA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3487, pp. 16–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., de Boer, F.S., Meyer, J.J.Ch.: Dynamic logic for plan revision in intelligent agents. Technical Report UU-CS-2005-013, Utrecht University, Institute of Information and Computing Sciences. Journal of Logic and Computation (to appear, 2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Plotkin, G.D.: A Structural Approach to Operational Semantics. Technical Report DAIMI FN-19, University of Aarhus (1981)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Meyer, J.J.Ch., de Boer, F.S.: Semantics of plan revision in intelligent agents. In: Rattray, C., Maharaj, S., Shankland, C. (eds.) AMAST 2004. LNCS, vol. 3116, pp. 426–442. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Meyer, J.J.C., de Boer, F.S.: Semantics of plan revision in intelligent agents. Theoretical Computer Science 351(2), 240–257 (2006); Special issue of Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology (AMAST 2004) zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Birna van Riemsdijk
    • 1
  • John-Jules Ch. Meyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations