Advertisement

Prioritized Goals and Subgoals in a Logical Account of Goal Change – A Preliminary Report

  • Shakil M. Khan
  • Yves Lespérance
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5948)

Abstract

Most previous logical accounts of goal change do not deal with prioritized goals and do not handle subgoals and their dynamics properly. Many are restricted to achievement goals. In this paper, we develop a logical account of goal change that addresses these deficiencies. In our account, we do not drop lower priority goals permanently when they become inconsistent with other goals and the agent’s knowledge; rather, we make such goals inactive. We ensure that the agent’s chosen goals/intentions are consistent with each other and the agent’s knowledge. When the world changes, the agent recomputes her chosen goals and some inactive goals may become active again. This ensures that our agent maximizes her utility. We also propose an approach for handling subgoals and their dynamics. We prove that the proposed account has some intuitively desirable properties.

Keywords

Priority Level Initial Situation Accessible Path Default Logic Situation Calculus 
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.
    Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Intention is Choice with Commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42(2-3), 213–361 (1990)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sadek, M.D.: A Study in the Logic of Intention. In: Third Intl. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R 1992), Cambridge, MA, pp. 462–473 (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Konolige, K., Pollack, M.E.: A Representationalist Theory of Intention. In: Thirteenth Intl. J. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1993), Chambéry, France, pp. 390–395 (1993)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Singh, M.P.: Multiagent Systems – A Theoretical Framework for Intentions, Know-How, and Communications. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 799. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shapiro, S., Lespérance, Y., Levesque, H.J.: Goals and Rational Action in the Situation Calculus - A Preliminary Report. In: Working Notes of the AAAI Fall Symposium on Rational Agency: Concepts, Theories, Models, and Applications, Cambridge, MA, November 1995, pp. 117–122 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sardina, S., Shapiro, S.: Rational Action in Agent Programs with Prioritized Goals. In: Second Intl. J. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Sys (AAMAS 2003), Melbourne, Australia, pp. 417–424 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shapiro, S., Brewka, G.: Dynamic Interactions Between Goals and Beliefs. In: Twentieth Intl. J. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2007), India, pp. 2625–2630 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Winikoff, M., Padgham, L., Harland, J., Thangarajah, J.: Declarative and Procedural Goals in Intelligent Agent Systems. In: Eighth Intl. Conf. on Principles and Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R 2002), Toulouse, France, pp. 470–481 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., Fallah-Seghrouchni, A.E. (eds.): Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Platforms and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bratman, M.E.: Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.J.: Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence. Machine Intelligence 4, 463–502 (1969)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action. Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DeGiacomo, G., Lespérance, Y., Levesque, H.J.: ConGolog, a Concurrent Programming Language Based on the Situation Calculus. Artificial Intelligence 121, 109–169 (2000)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Levesque, H.J., Pirri, F., Reiter, R.: Foundations for a Calculus of Situations. Electronic Transactions of AI (ETAI) 2(3-4), 159–178 (1998)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moore, R.C.: A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action. In: Hobbs, J.R., Moore, R.C. (eds.) Formal Theories of the Commonsense World, pp. 319–358. Ablex, Greenwich (1985)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Scherl, R., Levesque, H.: Knowledge, Action, and the Frame Problem. Artificial Intelligence 144(1-2), 1–39 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: Modeling Rational Agents with a BDI-Architecture. In: Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Second Intl. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R 1991), San Mateo, CA, pp. 473–484. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1991)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shapiro, S., Lespérance, Y., Levesque, H.J.: Goal Change in the Situation Calculus. J. of Logic and Computation 17(5), 983–1018 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sardina, S.: deSilva, L., Padgham, L.: Hierarchical Planning in BDI Agent Programming Languages: A Formal Approach. In: Fifth Intl. J. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2006), Hakodate, Japan, pp. 1001–1008 (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dastani, M., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.C.: Dynamics of Declarative Goals in Agent Programming. In: Leite, J., Omicini, A., Torroni, P., Yolum, p. (eds.) DALT 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3476, pp. 1–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dastani, M., Meyer, J.J.: Ch.: Semantics of Declarative Goals in Agent Programming. In: Fourth Int’l J. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Sys. (AAMAS 2005), pp. 133–140 (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dastani, M., Meyer, J.J.Ch.: Goals in Conflict: Semantic Foundations of Goals in Agent Programming. International Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (JAAMAS) 18(3), 471–500 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shakil M. Khan
    • 1
  • Yves Lespérance
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations