Agent-Oriented Modeling with Graph Transformation

  • Ralph Depke
  • Reiko Heckel
  • Jochen Malte Küster
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1957)


The agent paradigm can be seen as an extension of the notion of (active) objects by concepts like autonomy, cooperation, and goal-oriented behavior. Mainstream object-oriented modeling techniques do not account for these agentspecific aspects. Therefore, dedicated techniques for agent-oriented modeling are required which are based on the concepts and notations of object-oriented modeling and extend these in order to support agent-specific concepts.

In this paper, an agent-oriented modeling technique is introduced which is based on UML notation. Graph transformation is used both on the level of modeling in order to capture agent-specific aspects and as the underlying formal semantics of the approach.


Sequence Diagram Graph Transformation Graph Grammar Case Diagram Agent Class 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    M. Andries, G. Engels, A. Habel, B. Hoffmann, H.-J. Kreowski, S. Kuske, D. Plump, A. Schürr, and G. Taentzer. Graph transformation for specification and programming. Science of Computer Programming, 34:1–54, 1999.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Corradini, U. Montanari, and F. Rossi. Graph processes. Fundamenta Informaticae, 26(3,4):241–266, 1996.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Depke, R. Heckel, and J. M. Küster. Integrating visual modeling of agent-based and object-oriented systems. In Proc. Fourth Intern. Conference on Autonomous Agents (AGENTS-2000), Barcelona, Spain, June 2000.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Depke, R. Heckel, and J. M. Küster. Modeling agent-based systems with graph transformation. Technical Report No. 213, University of Paderborn, Dep. of Comp. Sci., August 2000.
  5. 5.
    R. Depke, R. Heckel, and J.M. Küster. Modeling agent-based systems with graph transformation and UML: From requirement specification to object-oriented design. In GRATRA 2000: Joint APPLIGRAPH/GETGRATS Workshop on Graph Transformation Systems, pages 87–95, Berlin, Germany, March 2000. Proceedings available at
  6. 6.
    H. Ehrig, G. Engels, H.-J. Kreowski, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 2: Applications, Languages, and Tools. World Scientific, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. Ehrig, H.-J. Kreowski, U. Montanari, and G. Rozenberg, editors. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3: Concurrency and Distribution. World Scientific, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Engels, R. Heckel, G. Taentzer, and H. Ehrig. A combined reference model-and viewbased approach to system specification. Int. Journal of Software and Knowledge Engeneering, 7(4):457–477, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA). Agent communication language. In FIPA 97 Specification, Version 2.0, FIPA, 1997.
  10. 10.
    S. Franklin and A. Graesser. Is it an agent, or just a program?: A taxonomy for autonomous agents. In J.P. Müller, M.J. Wooldridge, and N.R. Jennings, editors, Proc. ECAI’96Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages: Intelligent Agents III, volume 1193 of LNAI, pages 21–36. Springer-Verlag, August 12-13 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Harel. Statecharts: A visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 8:231–274, 1987.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. A. Iglesias, M. Garijo, J. C. González, and Juan R. Velasco. Analysis and design of multiagent systems using MAS-CommonKADS. In M.P. Singh, A. Rao, and M.J. Wooldridge, editors, Proc. 4th Int. Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL-97), volume 1365 of LNAI, pages 313–328. Springer-Verlag, July 24-26 1998.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bent B. Kristensen. Object Oriented Modeling with Roles. In Proc. 2nd International Conference on Object-Oriented Information Systems (OOIS’95), Dublin, Ireland, 1995, pages 57–71, London, 1996. Springer.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.M. Küster. Visual modeling of agent-based systems: A role-oriented approach using the UML. diploma thesis, University of Paderborn, Germany, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Jennings M. Wooldridge and D. Kinny. A methodology for agent-oriented analysis and design. In Proceedings of the third annual conference on Autonomous Agents, pages 69–76, Seattle, WA USA, May1-5 1999. ACM.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Object Management Group. UML specification version 1.3, June 1999.
  17. 17.
    G. Rozenberg, editor. Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 1: Foundations. World Scientific, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, and W. Lorensen. Object-oriented Modelling and Design. Prentice-Hall, 1991.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. G. Smith. The contract net protocol: High-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. In IEEE Transaction on Computers, number 12 in C-29, pages 1104–1113, 1980.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Wood and S. A. DeLoach. An Overview of the Multiagent Systems Engineering Methodology. In Proc. 1st International Workshop on Agent-Oriented Software Engineering (ICSE-2000 Workshop), Limerick, Ireland, 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Wooldridge, N. R. Jennings, and D. Kinny. The Gaia methodology for agent-oriented analysis and design. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 3(3):285–312, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ralph Depke
    • 1
  • Reiko Heckel
    • 1
  • Jochen Malte Küster
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversity of PaderbornPaderborn

Personalised recommendations