Modeling Agent Organizations

  • Stanislaw Ambroszkiewicz
  • Krzysztof Cetnarowicz
  • Jaroslaw Kozlak
  • Tomasz Nowak
  • Wojciech Penczek
Part of the Advances in Soft Computing book series (AINSC, volume 4)


We present a formal specification of an environment created by our mobile platform Pegaz [17]. Since all existing mobile agent platform create more or less the same infrastructure on a computer network, this formal specification may be seen as a formal representation of the cyberspace Then, we present a concept of agent organizations in a model of production environment. It is argued that such organizations can be applied in the cyberspace. Agents are supposed to form enterprises producing the commodity specified by the system designer, and then sell the commodity at the market. The goal of the designer is to create efficient enterprises producing the desired commodity. The market is modeled as the price oligopoly. The price oligopoly serves to eliminate enterprises that are not efficient.


Mobile Agent Virtual Enterprise Agent Organization Potential Demand Cooperation Mechanism 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Ambroszkiewicz, W. Penczek, and T. Nowak. (2000) “Towards Formal Specification and Verifications of Generic Cyberspace Infrastructure for Agents.” In Proc. The first Goddard Workshop on Formal Approaches to Agent-Based Systems, 6th-7th April 2000, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. Ambroszkiewicz, O. Matyja, and W. Penczek. (1998) “Team Formation by Self-Interested Mobile Agents.” In Proc$14-th Australian DAI-Workshop, Brisbane, Australia, July 13, 1998. Published in Springer LNAI 1544.
  3. 3.
    S. Ambroszkiewicz, K. Cetnarowicz, O. Matyja, and B. Radko. (1998) “Modeling Virtual Enterprise: agent-based approach.” In Proc. Multi Agent Systems Models Architecture and Applications. F. J. Garijo, and Ch. Lemaitre (Eds.), II Iberoamerican Workshop on D.A.I and M.A.S., October 1–2 1998 Toledo, Spain.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Ambroszkiewicz. (1999) “Agent Virtual Organizations within the Framework of Network Computing: a case study.” In Proc. CEEMAS’99, The First International Workshop of Central and Eastern Europe on Multi-agent Systems, May 30, June 2, 1999, St. Petersburg, Russia.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Bylka, S. Ambroszkiewicz, and J. Komar. Discrete Time Dynamic Game Model for Price Competition in an Oligopoly. To appear in Annals of Operation Research 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Chess. C. Harrison, A. Kershenbaum. (1997) Mobile Agents: Are They a Good Idea? In J. Vitek and Ch. Tschudin (Eds.) Mobile Object Systems. Springer LNCS 1222.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    The Object Management Group’s Common Object Request Broker Architecture (OMG/CORBA)
  9. 9.
    Y. Demazeau and A.C. R. Costa “Populations and Organisations in Open Multi-Agent Systems”, 1st Symposium on Parallel and Distributed AI, Hyderabad, India, July 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Ferber and O. Gutknecht. A meta-model for the analysis and design of organizations in multi-agent systems. In Proc. ICMAS-98.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    The Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA)
  12. 12.
    Software Agents in Communications Network Management: An Overview. Knowledge Engineering Review 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Ishida, M. Yokoo, and L. Gasser. (1990) An organizational Approach to Adaptive Production Systems. In Proc. of 8th National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence,Boston, USA.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Claudia Keser. (1991) Experimental duopoly markets with demand inertia, Bonn, PhD thesis under supervision of Richard Selten.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    E. Kuhn and G. Nozicka. (1996) Post Client/Server Coordination Tools. In W. Cohen, G. Neumann (Eds.) Coordination Technologies for Collaborative Applications. LNCS 1364. pp. 231–253.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. P. Mueller. (1998) Architectures and Applications of Intelligent Agents: A Survey. Knowledge Engineering Review.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pegaz - a mobile agent platform implemented at the Instutute of Computer Science PAS (WWW: ).
  18. 18.
    G. Sorger. (1995) Time Dynamic Game Models for Advertising Competition in a Duopoly. Optimal Control and Application and Methods. Vol. 16, 175–188.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Tirole. (1994) The Theory of Industrial Organizations. The MIT Press, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stanislaw Ambroszkiewicz
    • 1
  • Krzysztof Cetnarowicz
    • 2
  • Jaroslaw Kozlak
    • 2
  • Tomasz Nowak
    • 1
  • Wojciech Penczek
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Computer SciencePolish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of Mining and MetallurgyKrakowPoland

Personalised recommendations