Advertisement

Abstract

In this work we consider how to enforce norms in the Situation Calculus based programming language Golog and its relatives. We define a notion of norm compliant sequence of actions with respect to norms prescribing some actions to be forbidden or obliged (ought-to-do norms), norms prescribing that a state-condition is forbidden (ought-to-be norms) and norms that are a form of deadline. We then show a procedure that allows incorporating the norms into the underlying action theory so that after this is done, the agent’s behavior is guaranteed to be norm compliant.

Keywords

Business Process Multiagent System Action Type Execution Trace Primitive Action 
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.
    Shoham, Y., Tennenholtz, M.: On social laws for artificial agent societies: Off-line design. Artificial Intelligence 73(1-2), 231–252 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dastani, M., Grossi, D., Meyer, J.J.C., Tinnemeier, N.A.M.: Normative multi-agent programs and their logics. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Broersen, J. (eds.) KRAMAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5605, pp. 16–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boella, G., van der Torre, L.W.N.: Regulative and constitutive norms in normative multiagent systems. In: Dubois, D., Welty, C.A., Williams, M.A. (eds.) Ninth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 255–266 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sergot, M.: Norms, action and agency in multi-agent systems. In: Governatori, G., Sartor, G. (eds.) DEON 2010. LNCS, vol. 6181, pp. 2–2. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fitoussi, D., Tennenholtz, M.: Choosing social laws for multi-agent systems: Minimality and simplicity. Artificial Intelligence 119(1-2), 61–101 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Craven, R., Sergot, M.J.: Agent strands in the action language nC+. Journal of Applied Logic 6(2), 172–191 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levesque, H., Reiter, R., Lespérance, Y., Lin, F., Scherl, R.B.: Golog: A logic programming language for dynamic domains. Journal of Logic Programming 31(1-3), 59–83 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McCarthy, J.: Situations, actions and causal laws. Technical report, Stanford University (1963); Reprinted in Semantic Information Processing (M. Minsky ed.), pp. 410–417. MIT Press, Cambridge (1968)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Giacomo, G., Lesperance, Y., Levesque, H.: ConGolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus. Artificial Intelligence 121, 109–169 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boutilier, C., Reiter, R., Soutchanski, M., Thrun, S.: Decision-theoretic, high-level agent programming in the situation calculus. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2000), Austin, Texas, pp. 355–362 (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Giacomo, G., Levesque, H.J.: An incremental interpreter for high-level programs with sensing. In: Logical Foundations for Cognitive Agents: Contributions in Honor of Ray Reiter, pp. 86–102. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reiter, R.: The frame problem in the situation calculus: A simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. In: Lifschitz, V. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation, pp. 359–380. Academic Press, London (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Describing and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.: Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In: Meltzer, B., Michie, D. (eds.) Machine Intelligence, vol. 4, pp. 463–502. Edinburgh University Press (1969); Also appears in Nilsson, N., Webber, B.(eds.) Readings in Artificial Intelligence. Morgan-Kaufmann, San Francisco Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dignum, F., Broersen, J., Dignum, V., Meyer, J.J.C.: Meeting the deadline: Why, when and how. In: Hinchey, M.G., Rash, J.L., Truszkowski, W.F., Rouff, C. (eds.) FAABS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3228, pp. 30–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pirri, F., Reiter, R.: Some contributions to the metatheory of the Situation Calculus. Journal of the ACM 46(3), 325–364 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chomicki, J.: Efficient checking of temporal integrity constraints using bounded history encoding. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 20(2), 148–186 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gabaldon, A.: Compiling control knowledge into preconditions for planning in the situation calculus. In: Gottlob, G., Walsh, T. (eds.) 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2003), pp. 1061–1066 (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gabaldon, A.: Precondition control and the progression algorithm. In: Dubois, D., Welty, C., Williams, M.A. (eds.) 9th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2004), pp. 634–643 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bienvenu, M., Fritz, C., McIlraith, S.A.: Planning with qualitative temporal preferences. In: Doherty, P., Mylopoulos, J., Welty, C.A. (eds.) Tenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 134–144 (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alferes, J.J., Gabaldon, A., Leite, J.A.: Evolving logic programming based agents with temporal operators. In: IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT 2008), pp. 238–244. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alferes, J.J., Gabaldon, A., Leite, J.A.: Evolving logic programs with temporal operators. In: Balduccini, M., Son, T. (eds.) Logic Programming, Knowledge Representation, and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6565, pp. 193–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: A conceptually rich model of business process compliance. In: Link, S., Ghose, A. (eds.) 7th Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (APCCM 2010), vol. 110, pp. 3–12 (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Norm compliance in business process modeling. In: Dean, M., Hall, J., Rotolo, A., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2010. LNCS, vol. 6403, pp. 194–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Padmanabhan, V., Governatori, G., Sadiq, S.W., Colomb, R., Rotolo, A.: Process modelling: the deontic way. In: Stumptner, M., Hartmann, S., Kiyoki, Y. (eds.) 3rd Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (APCCM 2006), vol. 53, pp. 75–84 (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Governatori, G., Milosevic, Z., Sadiq, S.W.: Compliance checking between business processes and business contracts. In: 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2006), pp. 221–232. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Meneguzzi, F., Luck, M.: Norm-based behaviour modification in BDI agents. In: Sierra, C., Castelfranchi, C., Decker, K.S., Sichman, J.S. (eds.) 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 177–184 (2009)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Hindriks, K.V., Jonker, C.M., Sierhuis, M.: Formalizing organizational constraints: a semantic approach. In: van der Hoek, W., Kaminka, G.A., Lespérance, Y., Luck, M., Sen, S. (eds.) 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2010), pp. 823–830 (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hübner, J.F., Sichman, J.S., Boissier, O.: Developing organised multiagent systems using the MOISE+ model: programming issues at the system and agent levels. International Journal of AOSE 1(3-4), 370–395 (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Endriss, U., Maudet, N., Sadri, F., Toni, F.: Protocol conformance for logic-based agents. In: Gottlob, G., Walsh, T. (eds.) 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2003), pp. 679–684 (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Martelli, A., Patti, V.: A priori conformance verification for guaranteeing interoperability in open environments. In: Dan, A., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4294, pp. 339–351. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Chopra, A.K., Desai, N., Patti, V., Singh, M.P.: Choice, interoperability, and conformance in interaction protocols and service choreographies. In: Sierra, C., Castelfranchi, C., Decker, K.S., Sichman, J.S. (eds.) 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 843–850 (2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Venkatraman, M., Singh, M.P.: Verifying compliance with commitment protocols. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2(3), 217–236 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Desai, N., Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: Representing and reasoning about commitments in business processes. In: Holte, R.C., Howe, A. (eds.) 22nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2007), pp. 1328–1333. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2007)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: Producing compliant interactions: Conformance, coverage, and interoperability. In: Baldoni, M., Endriss, U. (eds.) DALT 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4327, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Commitment tracking via the reactive event calculus. In: Boutilier, C. (ed.) 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2009), pp. 91–96 (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Reiter, R.: Sequential, temporal GOLOG. In: Cohn, A., Schubert, L. (eds.) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference (KR 1998), pp. 547–556. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alfredo Gabaldon
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Artificial Intelligence (CENTRIA)Universidade Nova de LisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations