Abstract
Although various theories of intention have been proposed, it is not obvious whether any of them can be realized in a computer implementation. Conversely, although there are many multi-agent systems, it is not clear which theories of intention they embody. In this paper, we present an initial step towards provably realizing a theory of intention in a computer system. The theory is a simplified version of Cohen and Levesque's theory based on situation semantics. We present a logic of belief and intention that is sound and complete with respect to our semantics and show that the standard logical puzzles concerning intention are handled correctly within the framework. The implementation is based on a belief revision system operating under the principle of minimal change of entrenchment. The main insight behind our approach is that persistence is not a defining property of intention, but rather is a consequence of the application of the principle of minimal change to intentions. A feature of the approach is the separation between the logic used by the agent and the dynamical properties of the agent's mental states. As a result, it is possible to define a simple rational agent whose intentions persist but which does not believe that its intentions persist. We show how linear hierarchical plans specified as ordered sets of beliefs and intentions can be represented and executed by a rational agent with the use of a simple interpreter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alchourrón, C., Gärdenfors, P. & Makinson, D. (1985) ‘On the Logic ofTheory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions.’ Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50, 510–530.
Asher, N. & Koons, R. (1993) ‘The Revision of Beliefs and Intentions in a Changing World.’ Proceedings of the 1993 Spring Symposium on Reasoning about Mental States: Formal Theories and Applications, 1–9.
Barwise, J. & Perry, J. (1983) Situations and Attitudes. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Bell, J. (1995) ‘Changing Attitudes.’ in Wooldridge, M.J. & Jennings, N.R. (Eds) Intelligent Agents. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Bratman, M.E. (1987) Intention, Plans and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Chellas, B.F. (1980) Modal Logic: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Cohen, P.R. & Levesque, H.J. (1990a) ‘Persistence, Intention, and Commitment.’ in Cohen, P.R., Morgan, J. & Pollack, M.E. (Eds) Intentions in Communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cohen, P.R. & Levesque, H.J. (1990b) ‘Intention is Choice with Commitment.’ Artificial Intelligence, 42, 213–261.
Cohen, P.R. & Perrault, C.R. (1979) ‘Elements of a Plan-Based Theory of Speech Acts.’ Cognitive Science, 3, 177–212.
Dennett, D.C. (1987) The Intentional Stance. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Dixon, S.E. & Wobcke, W.R. (1993) ‘The Implementation of a First-Order Logic AGM Belief Revision System.’ Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, 40–47.
Fodor, J.A. (1975) The Language of Thought. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Gärdenfors, P. (1988) Knowledge in Flux. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Gärdenfors, P. & Makinson, D. (1988) ‘Revisions of Knowledge Systems Using Epistemic Entrenchment.’ Proceedings of the Second Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge, 83–95.
Georgeff, M.P. & Lansky, A.L. (1987) ‘Reactive Reasoning and Planning.’ Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-87), 677–682.
Jennings, N.R. (1995) ‘Controlling Cooperative Problem Solving in Industrial Multi-agent Systems Using Joint Intentions.’ Artificial Intelligence, 75, 195–240.
Kautz, H.A. (1990) ‘A Circumscriptive Theory of Plan Recognition.’ in Cohen, P.R., Morgan, J. & Pollack, M.E. (Eds) Intentions in Communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Konolige, K. & Pollack, M.E. (1993) ‘A Representationalist Theory of Intention.’ Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 390–395.
Pollack, M.E. (1990) ‘Plans as Complex Mental Attitudes.’ in Cohen, P.R., Morgan, J. & Pollack, M.E. (Eds) Intentions in Communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Rao, A.S. & Georgeff, M.P. (1991a) ‘Modeling Rational Agents within a BDI-Architecture.’ Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 473–484.
Rao, A.S. & Georgeff, M.P. (1991b) ‘Asymmetry Thesis and Side-Effect Problems in Linear-Time and Branching-Time Intention Logics.’ Proceedings of the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 498–504.
Rao, A.S. & Georgeff, M.P. (1992) ‘An Abstract Architecture for Rational Agents.’ Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 439–449.
Rott, H. (1991) ‘A Nonmonotonic Conditional Logic for Belief Revision.’ in Fuhrmann, A. & Morreau, M. (Eds) The Logic of Theory Change. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Russell, S.J. & Wefald, E. (1991) Do the Right Thing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Shoham, Y. (1988) Reasoning About Change. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Shoham, Y. (1993) ‘Agent-Oriented Programming.’ Artificial Intelligence, 60, 51–92.
Singh, M.P. (1992) ‘A Critical Examination of the Cohen-Levesque Theory of Intentions.’ Proceedings of the Tenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 364–368.
Williams, M. (1992) ‘Two Operators for Theory Base Change.’ Proceedings of the Fifth Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 259–265.
Wobcke, W.R. (1995) ‘Belief Revision, Conditional Logic and Nonmonotonic Reasoning.’ Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 36, 55–102.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wobcke, W. (1996). Plans and the revision of intentions. In: Zhang, C., Lukose, D. (eds) Distributed Artificial Intelligence Architecture and Modelling. DAI 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1087. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61314-5_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-61314-5_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-61314-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68456-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive