Skip to main content

Reasoning about Multi-agent Domains Using Action Language \(\mathcal{C}\): A Preliminary Study

  • Conference paper
Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems (CLIMA 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 6214))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper investigates the use of action languages, originally developed for representing and reasoning about single-agent domains, in modeling multi-agent domains. We use the action language \(\mathcal{C}\) and show that minimal extensions are sufficient to capture several multi-agent domains from the literature. The paper also exposes some limitations of action languages in modeling a specific set of features in multi-agent domains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Subrahmanian, V.S., Bonatti, P., Dix, J., Eiter, T., Kraus, S., Ozcan, F., Ross, R.: Heterogeneous Agent Systems: Theory and Implementation. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baker, A.: A simple solution to the Yale Shooting Problem. In: KRR, pp. 11–20 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bellifemine, F.L., Caire, G., Greenwood, D.: Developing Multi-Agent Systems with JADE. J. Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2007)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Bordini, R.H., Hübner, J.F., Wooldridge, M.: Programming Multi-agent Systems in AgentSpeak using Jason. J. Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2007)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Boella, G., van der Torre, L.: Enforceable social laws. In: AAMAS 2005, pp. 682–689. ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boutilier, C., Brafman, R.I.: Partial-order planning with concurrent interacting actions. J. Artif. Intell. Res (JAIR) 14, 105–136 (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Braubach, L., Pokahr, A., Lamersdorf, W.: Jadex: a BDI-Agent System Combining Middleware and Reasoning. In: Software Agent-based Applications, Platforms and Development Kits. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brenner, M.: Planning for Multi-agent Environments: From Individual Perceptions to Coordinated Execution. In: Work. on Multi-agent Planning and Scheduling, ICAPS, pp. 80–88 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dastani, M., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.: 3APL: A Programming Language for Cognitive Agents. ERCIM News, European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Special issue on Cognitive Systems (53) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. De Giacomo, G., Lespèrance, Y., Levesque, H.J.: ConGolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus. Artificial Intelligence 121(1–2), 109–169 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Jennings, N., Sycara, K., Wooldridge, M.: A roadmap of agent research and development. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 1, 7–38 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fagin, R., Halpern, J., Moses, Y., Vardi, M.: Reasoning about Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Fisher, M.: A survey of Concurrent METATEM – the language and its applications. In: Gabbay, D.M., Ohlbach, H.J. (eds.) ICTL 1994. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 827, pp. 480–505. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Representing actions and change by logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming 17(2,3,4), 301–323 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Action languages. ETAI 3(6) (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gerbrandy, J.: Logics of propositional control. In: AAMAS 2006, pp. 193–200. ACM, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hanks, S., McDermott, D.: Nonmonotonic logic and temporal projection. Artificial Intelligence 33(3), 379–412 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Herzig, A., Troquard, N.: Knowing how to play: uniform choices in logics of agency. In: AAMAS 2006, pp. 209–216 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  19. de Boer, F.S., Hindriks, K.V., van der Hoek, W., Ch, J.-J.: Meyer. A verification framework for agent programming with declarative goals. Journal of Applied Logic 5, 277–302 (2005)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Kautz, H.: The logic of persistence. In: Proceedings of AAAI 1986, pp. 401–405. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mascardi, V., Martelli, M., Sterling, L.: Logic-Based Specification Languages for Intelligent Software Agents. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(4), 495–537

    Google Scholar 

  22. McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.: Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. Machine Intelligence 4, 463–502 (1969)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Rao, A.S.: AgentSpeak(L): BDI Agents Speak Out in a Logical Computable Language. In: Perram, J., Van de Velde, W. (eds.) MAAMAW 1996. LNCS, vol. 1038, pp. 42–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Sauro, L., Gerbrandy, J., van der Hoek, W., Wooldridge, M.: Reasoning about action and cooperation. In: AAMAS 2006, pp. 185–192. ACM Press, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Scherl, R., Levesque, H.: Knowledge, action, and the frame problem. Artificial Intelligence 144(1-2) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Son, T.C., Baral, C.: Formalizing sensing actions - a transition function based approach. Artificial Intelligence 125(1-2), 19–91 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Son, T.C., Baral, C., Tran, N., McIlraith, S.: Domain-dependent knowledge in answer set planning. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 7(4), 613–657 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Son, T.C., Sakama, C.: Reasoning and Planning with Cooperative Actions for Multiagents Using Answer Set Programming. In: Baldoni, M., Bentahar, J., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Lloyd, J. (eds.) DALT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5948, pp. 208–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Son, T.C., Pontelli, E., Sakama, C.: Logic Programming for Multiagent Planning with Negotiation. In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) Logic Programming. LNCS, vol. 5649, pp. 99–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Spaan, M., Gordon, G.J., Vlassis, N.A.: Decentralized planning under uncertainty for teams of communicating agents. In: AAMAS 2006, pp. 249–256 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  31. van der Hoek, W., Jamroga, W., Wooldridge, M.: A logic for strategic reasoning, pp. 157–164. ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  32. van Ditmarsch, H.P., van der Hoek, W., Kooi, B.P.: Concurrent Dynamic Epistemic Logic for MAS. In: AAMAS (2003)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Baral, C., Son, T.C., Pontelli, E. (2010). Reasoning about Multi-agent Domains Using Action Language \(\mathcal{C}\): A Preliminary Study. In: Dix, J., Fisher, M., Novák, P. (eds) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems. CLIMA 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6214. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16867-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16867-3_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16866-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16867-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics