Advertisement

Trace-Based Specification of Law and Guidance Policies for Multi-Agent Systems

  • Scott J. Harmon
  • Scott A. DeLoach
  • Robby
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4995)

Abstract

Policies have traditionally been a way to specify properties of a system. In this paper, we show how policies can be applied to the Organization Model for Adaptive Computational Systems (OMACS). In OMACS, policies may constrain assignments of agents to roles, the structure of the goal model for the organization, or how an agent may play a particular role. In this paper, we focus on policies limiting system traces; this is done to leverage the work already done for specification and verification of properties in concurrent programs. We show how traditional policies can be characterized as law policies; that is, they must always be followed by a system. In the context of multiagent systems, law policies limit the flexibility of the system. Thus, in order to preserve the system flexibility while still being able to guide the system into preferring certain behaviors, we introduce the concept of guidance policies. These guidance policies need not always be followed; when the system cannot continue with the guidance policies, they may be suspended. We show how this can guide how the system achieves the top-level goal while not decreasing flexibility of the system. Guidance policies are formally defined and, since multiple guidance policies can introduce conflicts, a strategy for resolving conflicts is given.

Keywords

Model Check Multiagent System Linear Temporal Logic Goal Model Guidance Policy 
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.
    Kephart, J.O., Chess, D.M.: The vision of autonomic computing. Computer 36(1), 41–50 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bradshaw, J., Uszok, A., Jeffers, R., Suri, N., Hayes, P., Burstein, M., Acquisti, A., Benyo, B., Breedy, M., Carvalho, M., Diller, D., Johnson, M., Kulkarni, S., Lott, J., Sierhuis, M., Van Hoof, R.: Representation and reasoning for DAML-based policy and domain services in KAoS and Nomads. In: AAMAS 2003: Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp. 835–842. ACM Press, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shoham, Y., Tennenholtz, M.: On social laws for artificial agent societies: Off-line design. Artificial Intelligence 73(1-2), 231–252 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stoller, S.D., Unnikrishnan, L., Liu, Y.A.: Efficient detection of global properties in distributed systems using partial-order methods. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 264–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kagal, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A.: A policy based approach to security for the semantic web. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K.P., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 402–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paruchuri, P., Tambe, M., Ordóñez, F., Kraus, S.: Security in multiagent systems by policy randomization. In: AAMAS 2006: Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp. 273–280. ACM Press, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Uszok, A., Bradshaw, J., Jeffers, R., Suri, N., Hayes, P., Breedy, M., Bunch, L., Johnson, M., Kulkarni, S., Lott, J.: Kaos policy and domain services: toward a description-logic approach to policy representation, deconfliction, and enforcement. In: POLICY 2003: IEEE 4th International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks, pp. 93–96. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Artikis, A., Sergot, M., Pitt, J.: Specifying norm-governed computational societies. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Viganò, F., Colombetti, M.: Symbolic Model Checking of Institutions. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Electronic Commerce (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    DeLoach, S.A., Oyenan, W., Matson, E.T.: A capabilities based theory of artificial organizations. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller, M.: A goal model for dynamic systems. Master’s thesis, Kansas State University (April 2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.: Organisational rules as an abstraction for the analysis and design of multi-agent systems. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering 11(3), 303–328 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DeLoach, S.A.: Modeling organizational rules in the multi-agent systems engineering methodology. In: Cohen, R., Spencer, B. (eds.) Canadian AI 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2338, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robby, DeLoach, S.A., Kolesnikov, V.A.: Using design metrics for predicting system flexibility. In: Baresi, L., Heckel, R. (eds.) FASE 2006 and ETAPS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3922, pp. 184–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhong, C., DeLoach, S.A.: An investigation of reorganization algorithms. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ICAI 2006), Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 514–517. CSREA Press (June 2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    DiLeo, J., Jacobs, T., DeLoach, S.: Integrating ontologies into multiagent systems engineering. In: Fourth International Conference on Agent-Oriented Information Systems (AIOS 2002), CEUR-WS.org (July 2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corbett, J.C., Dwyer, M.B., Hatcliff, J., Robby: Expressing checkable properties of dynamic systems: The bandera specification language. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT) 4(1), 34–56 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Manna, Z., Pnueli, A.: The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems: Specification. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Büchi, J.R.: On a decision method in restricted second-order arithmetics. In: Proceedings of International Congress of Logic Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Palo Alto, CA, USA, pp. 1–12. Stanford University Press (1960)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Olender, K.M., Osterweil, L.J.: Cecil: A sequencing constraint language for automatic static analysis generation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 16(3), 268–280 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chaki, S., Clarke, E.M., Ouaknine, J., Sharygina, N., Sinha, N.: State/event-based software model checking. In: Boiten, E.A., Derrick, J., Smith, G.P. (eds.) IFM 2004. LNCS, vol. 2999, pp. 128–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Clarke Jr., E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ligatti, J., Bauer, L., Walker, D.: Edit automata: Enforcement mechanisms for run-time security policies. In: International Journal of Information Security, vol. 4, pp. 2–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dwyer, M.B., Avrunin, G.S., Corbett, J.C.: Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification. In: Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Smith, R.L., Avrunin, G.S., Clarke, L.A., Osterweil, L.J.: Propel: an approach supporting property elucidation. In: ICSE 2002: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 11–21. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Peña, J., Hinchey, M.G., Sterritt, R.: Towards modeling, specifying and deploying policies in autonomous and autonomic systems using an AOSE methodology. EASE 0, 37–46 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Scott J. Harmon
    • 1
  • Scott A. DeLoach
    • 1
  • Robby
    • 1
  1. 1.Kansas State UniversityManhattanUSA

Personalised recommendations