Advertisement

The SOCS Computational Logic Approach to the Specification and Verification of Agent Societies

  • Marco Alberti
  • Federico Chesani
  • Marco Gavanelli
  • Evelina Lamma
  • Paola Mello
  • Paolo Torroni
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3267)

Abstract

This article summarises part of the work done during the first two years of the SOCS project, with respect to the task of modelling interaction amongst CL-based agents. It describes the SOCS social model: an agent interaction specification and verification framework equipped with a declarative and operational semantics, expressed in terms of abduction. The operational counterpart of the proposed framework has been implemented and integrated in SOCS-SI, a tool that can be used for on-the-fly verification of agent compliance with respect to specified protocols.

Keywords

Logic Program Multiagent System Logic Programming Integrity Constraint Proof Tree 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bracciali, A., Demetriou, N., Endriss, U., Kakas, A., Lu, W., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Terreni, G., Toni, F.: The KGP model of agency: Computational model and prototype implementation. In: Priami, C., Quaglia, P. (eds.) GC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3267, pp. 340–367. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Global Computing, Future and Emerging Technologies: Co-operation of Autonomous and Mobile Entities in Dynamic Environments. Home Page: http://www.cordis.lu/ist/fetgc.htm
  3. 3.
    Societies Of ComputeeS (SOCS): a computational logic model for the description, analysis and verification of global and open societies of heterogeneous computees. Home Page: http://lia.deis.unibo.it/research/socs/
  4. 4.
    Hewitt, C.: Open information systems semantics for distributed artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 47, 79–106 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Artikis, A., Pitt, J., Sergot, M.: Animated specifications of computational societies. In: Castelfranchi, C., Lewis Johnson, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Part III, Bologna, Italy, pp. 1053–1061. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alberti, M., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Modeling interactions using Social Integrity Constraints: A resource sharing case study. In: Leite, J.A., Omicini, A., Sterling, L., Torroni, P. (eds.) DALT 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2990, pp. 243–262. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kakas, A.C., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: The role of abduction in logic programming. In: Gabbay, D.M., Hogger, C.J., Robinson, J.A. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 5, pp. 235–324. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fung, T.H., Kowalski, R.A.: The IFF proof procedure for abductive logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming 33, 151–165 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jaffar, J., Maher, M.: Constraint logic programming: a survey. Journal of Logic Programming 19-20, 503–582 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alberti, M., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Specification and verification of interaction protocols: a computational logic approach based on abduction. Technical Report CS-2003-03, Dipartimento di Ingegneria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy (2003), Available at: http://www.ing.unife.it/aree_ricerca/informazione/cs/technical_reports
  11. 11.
    Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Compliance verification of agent interaction: a logic-based tool. In: Trappl, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 17th European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, Symposium “From Agent Theory to Agent Implementation” (AT2AI-4), Vienna, Austria, Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies, vol. II, pp. 570–575 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stathis, K., Kakas, A.C., Lu, W., Demetriou, N., Endriss, U., Bracciali, A.: PROSOCS: a platform for programming software agents in computational logic. In: Trappl, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 17th European Meeting on Cybernetics and Systems Research, Symposium “From Agent Theory to Agent Implementation” (AT2AI-4), Vienna, Austria, Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies, vol. II, pp. 523–528 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lloyd, J.W.: Foundations of Logic Programming, 2nd extended edn. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Torroni, P., Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P.: A logic based approach to interaction design in open multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE 2004), 2nd international workshop “Theory and Practice of Open Computational Systems (TAPOCS)”, Modena, Italy. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (to appear, 2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alberti, M., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: An Abductive Interpretation for Open Societies. In: Cappelli, A., Turini, F. (eds.) AI*IA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2829, pp. 287–299. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cox, P.T., Pietrzykowski, T.: Causes for events: Their computation and applications. In: Proceedings CADE 1986, pp. 608–621 (1986)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eshghi, K., Kowalski, R.A.: Abduction compared with negation by failure. In: Levi, G., Martelli, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming, pp. 234–255. MIT Press, Cambridge (1989)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kakas, A.C., Mancarella, P.: On the relation between Truth Maintenance and Abduction. In: Fukumura, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, PRICAI 1990, Nagoya, Japan, Ohmsha Ltd., pp. 438–443 (1990)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Poole, D.L.: A logical framework for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 36, 27–47 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kunen, K.: Negation in logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming 4, 289–308 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jaffar, J., Maher, M., Marriott, K., Stuckey, P.: The semantics of constraint logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming 37(1-3), 1–46 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    FIPA Query Interaction Protocol (2001) Published on August 10th, 2001. Available for download from the FIPA web site (2001) (published), http://www.fipa.org
  23. 23.
    SICStus prolog user manual, release 3.11.0, Available for download from the SICS web site (2003), http://www.sics.se/isl/sicstus/
  24. 24.
    Frühwirth, T.: Theory and practice of constraint handling rules. Journal of Logic Programming 37, 95–138 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Holzbaur, C.: Specification of constraint based inference mechanism through extended unification. Dissertation, Dept. of Medical Cybernetics & AI, University of Vienna (1990)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Conte, R., Falcone, R., Sartor, G.: Special issue on agents and norms. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (1999)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Castelfranchi, C., Dignum, F., Jonker, C., Treur, J.: Deliberative normative agents: Principles and architecture. In: Jennings, N.R. (ed.) ATAL 1999. LNCS, vol. 1757, pp. 364–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ALFEBIITE: A Logical Framework for Ethical Behaviour between Infohabitants in the Information Trading Economy of the universal information ecosystem. IST-1999-10298 (1999), Home Page: http://www.iis.ee.ic.ac.uk/~alfebiite/ab-home.htm
  29. 29.
    Mello, P., Torroni, P., Gavanelli, M., Alberti, M., Ciampolini, A., Milano, M., Roli, A., Lamma, E., Riguzzi, F., Maudet, N.: A logic-based approach to model interaction amongst computees. Technical report, SOCS Consortium (2003), Deliverable D5 (Available on request)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yolum, P., Singh, M.: Flexible protocol specification and execution: applying event calculus planning using commitments. In: Castelfranchi, C., Lewis Johnson, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Part II, Bologna, Italy, pp. 527–534. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Singh, M.: Agent communication language: rethinking the principles, pp. 40–47. IEEE Computer, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Castelfranchi, C., Lewis Johnson, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Part II, Bologna, Italy, pp. 535–542. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Colombetti, M., Fornara, N., Verdicchio, M.: The role of institutions in multiagent systems. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Knowledge based and reasoning agents, VIII Convegno AI*IA 2002, Siena, Italy (2002)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Colombetti, M., Fornara, N., Verdicchio, M.: A social approach to communication in multiagent systems. In: Leite, J.A., Omicini, A., Sterling, L., Torroni, P. (eds.) DALT 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2990, pp. 193–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kakas, A., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Toni, F.: A logic-based approach to model computees. Technical report, SOCS Consortium (2003), Deliverable D4 (Available on request)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dignum, V., Meyer, J.J., Dignum, F., Weigand, H.: Formal specification of interaction in agent societies. In: Hinchey, M.G., Rash, J.L., Truszkowski, W.F., Rouff, C.A., Gordon-Spears, D.F. (eds.) FAABS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2699, pp. 37–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Arisha, K.A., Ozcan, F., Ross, R., Subrahmanian, V.S., Eiter, T., Kraus, S.: IMPACT: a Platform for Collaborating Agents. IEEE Intelligent Systems 14, 64–72 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Eiter, T., Subrahmanian, V., Pick, G.: Heterogeneous active agents, I: Semantics. Artificial Intelligence 108, 179–255 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kakas, A.C., Lamma, E., Mancarella, P., Mello, P., Stathis, K., Toni, F.: Computational model for computees and societies of computees. Technical report, SOCS Consortium (2003), Deliverable D8 (Available on request)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Russo, A., Miller, R., Nuseibeh, B., Kramer, J.: An abductive approach for analysing event-based requirements specifications. In: Stuckey, P.J. (ed.) ICLP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2401, pp. 22–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. New Generation Computing 4, 67–95 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Esteva, M., de la Cruz, D., Sierra, C.: ISLANDER: an electronic institutions editor. In: Castelfranchi, C., Lewis Johnson, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), Part III, Bologna, Italy, pp. 1045–1052. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bracciali, A., Kakas, A.C., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Stathis, K., Toni, F., Torroni, P.: D11: Evaluation and self assessment. Technical report, SOCS Consortium (2003), Deliverable D11 (Available on request)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    MASSiVE: sviluppo e verifica di sistemi multi-agente basati sulla logica. Home Page: http://www.di.unito.it/massive/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Alberti
    • 1
  • Federico Chesani
    • 2
  • Marco Gavanelli
    • 1
  • Evelina Lamma
    • 1
  • Paola Mello
    • 2
  • Paolo Torroni
    • 2
  1. 1.Dip. di IngegneriaUniversità di FerraraFerraraItaly
  2. 2.DEISUniversità di BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations