Advertisement

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 219–251 | Cite as

Situated artificial institutions: stability, consistency, and flexibility in the regulation of agent societies

  • Maiquel de BritoEmail author
  • Jomi Fred Hübner
  • Olivier Boissier
Article

Abstract

In multi-agent systems, norms are a usual way to regulate the behaviour of autonomous agents. To be stable in different circumstances, norms are specified using high level terms, abstracting from the particular dynamics of the environment where the agents are situated. However, applying these norms requires a proper link with a concrete environment. Detaching that link from the norms themselves provides stability to the normative regulation but raises consistency and flexibility issues. Consistency is achieved when the abstract norms are coherent with the environment under regulation. Flexibility is achieved when different kinds of norms share the same interpretation about the environmental state. These properties are provided in some current works. However, since they are interrelated, there is not, to our knowledge, a single proposal providing all of them. This paper proposes the situated artificial institution (SAI) model to address these three issues—stability, consistency, and flexibility—by conceiving norms as part of institutions that provide, through the process of constitution, a social interpretation of the environmental state. After the presentation of the formalised model of SAI, a case study is used to illustrate and test this approach.

Keywords

Institutions Norms Count-as Situatedness 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research supported by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), linked to the Ministry of Education in Brazil (Grant PDSE 4926-14-5) and by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), linked to the Ministry of Science and Technology in Brazil (Grants 448462/2014-1, 306301/2012-1).

References

  1. 1.
    Aldewereld, H., Álvarez Napagao, S., Dignum, F., & Vázquez-Salceda, J. (2010). Making norms concrete. In W. van der Hoek, G. A. Kaminka, Y. Lespérance, M. Luck, & S. Sen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2010) (Vol. 1–3, pp. 807–814). Richland, SC: IFAAMAS.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrighetto, G., Governatori, G., Noriega, P., & van der Torre, L. W. N. (Eds.) (2013). Normative multi-agent systems. In Dagstuhl follow-ups (Vol. 4). Dagstuhl: Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aranda-Corral, G.A., Borrego-Díaz, J., & Martín, D. S. (2005). Iabastos: An intelligent marketplace for agricultural products. In Y. Demazeau (Eds.) et al. [34] (pp. 255–258).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18944-4.
  4. 4.
    Artikis, A., Pitt, J., & Sergot, M. (2002). Animated specifications of computational societies. In Proceedings of the first international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2002) (pp. 1053–1062). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Artikis, A., Sergot, M. J., & Pitt, J. V. (2009). Specifying norm-governed computational societies. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1459010.1459011.
  6. 6.
    Balke, T., da Costa Pereira, C., Dignum, F., Lorini, E., Rotolo, A., Vasconcelos, W., & Villata, S. (2013). Norms in MAS: Definitions and related concepts. In G. Andrighetto (Eds.), et al. [2] (pp. 1–31).  https://doi.org/10.4230/DFU.Vol4.12111.1.
  7. 7.
    Boella, G., Noriega, P., Pigozzi, G., & Verhagen, H. (Eds.). (2009). Normative multi-agent systems, 15.03.–20.03.2009. In Dagstuhl seminar proceedings (Vol. 09121). Dagstuhl: Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boella, G., & van der Torre, L. (2004). An agent oriented ontology of social reality. In Proceedings of formal ontologies in information systems (FOIS’2004) (pp. 199–209). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boella, G., & van der Torre, L. (2006). Constitutive norms in the design of normative multiagent systems. In F. Toni, & P. Torroni (Eds.), Computational logic in multi-agent systems, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 3900, pp. 303–319). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/11750734_17.
  10. 10.
    Boella, G., & van der Torre, L. (2006). A logical architecture of a normative system. In L. Goble, & J. J. Meyer (Eds.), Deontic logic and artificial normative systems, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4048, pp. 24–35). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/11786849_5.
  11. 11.
    Boella, G., van der Torre, L., & Verhagen, H. (2008). Introduction to the special issue on normative multiagent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 17(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boella, G., & van der Torre, L. W. N. (2004). Regulative and constitutive norms in normative multiagent systems. In D. Dubois, C. A. Welty, & M. A. Williams (Eds.), Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning: Proceedings of the ninth international conference (KR2004) (pp. 255–266). Whistler: AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boella, G., van der Torre, L. W. N., & Verhagen, H. (Eds.). (2007). Normative multi-agent systems, 18.03.–23.03.2007. In Dagstuhl seminar proceedings (Vol. 07122). Dagstuhl: Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum für Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brachman, R., & Levesque, H. (2004). Knowledge representation and reasoning. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bromuri, S., & Stathis, K. (2009). Distributed agent environments in the ambient event calculus. In A. S. Gokhale, & D. C. Schmidt (Eds.), Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on distributed event-based systems, DEBS 2009, Nashville, TN. ACM.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1619258.1619275.
  16. 16.
    Campos, J., López-Sánchez, M., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J., & Esteva, M. (2009). Formalising situatedness and adaptation in electronic institutions. In J. Hübner, E. Matson, O. Boissier, & V. Dignum (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions and norms in agent systems IV, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 5428, pp. 126–139). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cardoso, H. L., & Oliveira, E. C. (2007). Institutional reality and norms: Specifying and monitoring agent organizations. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 16(1), 67–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cassandras, C. G., & Lafortune, S. (2006). Introduction to discrete event systems. Secaucus, NJ: Springer.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Castelfranchi, C. (2000). Engineering social order. In A. Omicini, R. Tolksdorf, & F. Zambonelli (Eds.), Engineering societies in the agent world, first international workshop, ESAW 2000, Berlin, Germany, August 21, 2000, Revised Papers, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 1972, pp. 1–18). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cliffe, O., De Vos, M., & Padget, J. (2007). Answer set programming for representing and reasoning about virtual institutions. In K. Inoue, K. Satoh, & F. Toni (Eds.), Computational logic in multi-agent systems, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4371, pp. 60–79). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69619-3_4.
  21. 21.
    Criado, N., Argente, E., & Botti, V. J. (2011). Open issues for normative multi-agent systems. AI Communications, 24(3), 233–264.  https://doi.org/10.3233/AIC-2011-0502.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cuní, G., Esteva, M., Garcia, P., Puertas, E., Sierra, C., & Solchaga, T. (2004). MASFIT: Multi-agent system for flsh trading. In R. L. de Mántaras, & L. Saitta (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th European conference on artificial intelligence, ECAI’2004, including prestigious applicants of intelligent systems, PAIS 2004, August 22–27, 2004 (pp. 710–714). Valencia: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Brito, M., Hübner, J. F., & Boissier, O. (2014). A conceptual model for situated artificial institutions. In N. Bulling, L. van der Torre, S. Villata, W. Jamroga, & W. Vasconcelos (Eds.), Computational logic in multi-agent systems, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8624, pp. 35–51). Cham: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09764-0_3.
  24. 24.
    de Brito, M., Hübner, J. F., & Boissier, O. (2015). Bringing constitutive dynamics to situated artificial institutions. In F. C. Pereira, P. Machado, E. Costa, & A. Cardoso (Eds.), Progress in artificial intelligence—17th Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence, EPIA 2015, Coimbra, Portugal. Proceedings, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 9273, pp. 624–637). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    de Brito, M., Hübner, J. F., & Boissier, O. (2015). Coupling regulative and constitutive dimensions in situated artificial institutions. In M. Rovatsos, G. A. Vouros, & V. Julián (Eds.), Multi-agent systems and agreement technologies—13th European conference, EUMAS 2015, and third international conference, AT 2015, Athens, December 17–18, 2015, revised selected papers, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 9571, pp. 318–334). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    de Brito, M., Hübner, J. F., & Bordini, R. H. (2013). Programming institutional facts in multi-agent systems. In H. Aldewereld, & J. S. A. Sichman (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems VIII, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 7756, pp. 158–173). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37756-3_10.
  27. 27.
    de Brito, M., Thévin, L., Garbay, C., Boissier, O., & Hübner, J. (2015). Institution artificielle située pour une aide à la régulation dans le cadre de la gestion de crises. In L. Vercouter & G. Picard (Eds.), 23es Journées Francophones sur les Systèmes multi-agents (JFSMA’15) (pp. 133–142). Rennes: Cépaduès.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    de Brito, M., Thévin, L., Garbay, C., Boissier, O., & Hübner, J. (2016). Supporting flexible regulation of crisis management by means of situated artificial institutions. Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering, 17(4), 309–324.  https://doi.org/10.1631/FITEE.1500369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    de Brito, M., Thévin, L., Garbay, C., Boissier, O., & Hübner, J. F. (2015) Situated artificial institution to support advanced regulation in the field of crisis management. In Y. Demazeau (Eds.), et al. [34] (pp. 66–79).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18944-4_6.
  30. 30.
    de Brito, M., Thévin, L., Garbay, C., Boissier, O., & Hübner, J. F. (2015). Situated regulation on a crisis management collaboration platform. In Y. Demazeau (Eds.), et al. [34] (pp. 267–270).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18944-4.
  31. 31.
    de Brito, M., Thévin, L., Garbay, C., Boissier, O., & Hübner, J. F. (2016). Institution artificielle située pour une aide à la régulation de la gestion de crises. Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle, 30(1–2), 185–209.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dastani, M., Grossi, D., Meyer, J. J. C., & Tinnemeier, N. (2009). Knowledge representation for agents and multi-agent systems, chap. In Normative multi-agent programs and their logics (pp. 16–31). Berlin: Springe.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dastani, M., van der Torre, L. W. N., & Yorke-Smith, N. (2012). Monitoring interaction in organisations. In Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems VIII—14th international workshop, COIN 2012, held co-located with AAMAS 2012, Valencia, Spain, June 5, 2012, Revised Selected Papers (pp. 17–34). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37756-3_2.
  34. 34.
    Demazeau, Y., Decker, K. S., Pérez, J. B., & de la Prieta, F. (Eds.). (2015). Advances in practical applications of agents, multi-agent systems, and sustainability: The PAAMS collection—13th International Conference, PAAMS 2015, Salamanca, Spain, June 3–4, 2015, proceedings, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 9086). Cham: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18944-4.
  35. 35.
    Dignum, V., Vázquez-Salceda, J., & Dignum, F. (2004). A model of almost everything: Norms, structure and ontologies in agent organizations. In 3rd international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2004), August 19–23, 2004 (pp. 1498–1499). New York, NY. IEEE Computer Society.  https://doi.org/10.1109/AAMAS.2004.10250.
  36. 36.
    Esteva, M., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J. A., Sierra, C., Garcia, P., & Arcos, J. L. (2001). On the formal specifications of electronic institutions. In F. Dignum & C. Sierra (Eds.), AgentLink, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 1991, pp. 126–147). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Farjam, M., & Kirchkamp, O. (2015). Bubbles in hybrid markets—How expectations about algorithmic trading affect human trading. CESifo Working Paper Series 5631, CESifo Group Munich.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fornara, N., Viganò, F., Verdicchio, M., & Colombetti, M. (2008). Artificial institutions: a model of institutional reality for open multiagent systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 16(1), 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Franklin, S., & Graesser, A. (1997). Is it an agent, or just a program? A taxonomy for autonomous agents. In J. P. Müller, M. J. Wooldridge, & N. R. Jennings (Eds.), Intelligent agents III agent theories, architectures, and languages: ECAI’96 Workshop (ATAL) Budapest, Hungary, August 12–13, 1996 proceedings, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 1193, pp. 21–35). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013570.
  40. 40.
    Geiger, R. S. (2009). The social roles of bots and assisted editing programs. In D. Riehle, & A. Bruckman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2009 international symposium on Wikis, 2009, Orlando, Florida, USA, October 25–27, 2009. New York, NY: ACM.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1641309.1641351.
  41. 41.
    Geiger, R. S. (2011). The lives of bots. In G. Lovink & N. Tkacz (Eds.), Critical point of view: A Wikipedia Reader (pp. 79–93). Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Grossi, D., Aldewereld, H., Vázquez-Salceda, J., & Dignum, F. (2006). Ontological aspects of the implementation of norms in agent-based electronic institutions. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 12(2–3), 251–275.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Grossi, D., & Dignum, F. (2004). From abstract to concrete norms in agent institutions. In Formal approaches to agent-based systems, third international workshop, FAABS 2004, Greenbelt, MD, USA, April 26–27, 2004, Revised Selected Papers (pp. 12–29).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30960-4_2.
  44. 44.
    Grossi, D., & Dignum, F. (2005). From abstract to concrete norms in agent institutions. In M. Hinchey, J. Rash, W. Truszkowski, & C. Rouff (Eds.), Formal approaches to agent-based systems, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 3228, pp. 12–29). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30960-4_2.
  45. 45.
    Grossi, D., & Jones, A. J. I. (2014). Constitutive norms and counts-as conditionals. In D. Gabbay, J. Horty, X. Parent, R. van der Meyden, & L. Torre (Eds.), Handbook of deontic logic and normative systems (pp. 407–441). London, UK: College Publications.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Helleboogh, A., Vizzari, G., Uhrmacher, A., & Michel, F. (2006). Modeling dynamic environments in multi-agent simulation. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 14(1), 87–116.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-006-0014-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hindriks, F. (2012). But where is the university? Dialectica, 66(1), 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hübner, J. F., Boissier, O., & Bordini, R. H. (2010). A normative organisation programming language for organisation management infrastructures. In J. Padget, A. Artikis, W. Vasconcelos, K. Stathis, V. T. Silva, E. Matson, & A. Polleres (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions and norms in agent systems V, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 6069, pp. 114–129). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14962-7_8.
  49. 49.
    Hübner, J. F., Boissier, O., & Bordini, R. H. (2011). A normative programming language for multi-agent organisations. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 62(1–2), 27–53.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hübner, J. F., Boissier, O., Kitio, R., & Ricci, A. (2009). Instrumenting multi-agent organisations with organisational artifacts and agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 20(3), 369–400.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9084-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hübner, J. F., Sichman, J. S., & Boissier, O. (2007). Developing organised multiagent systems using the MOISE+ model: Programming issues at the system and agent levels. International Journal of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, 1(3/4), 370–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Jones, A., & Sergot, M. (1996). A formal characterisation of institutionalised power. Logic Journal of IGPL, 4(3), 427–443.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Jones, A. J. I., & Sergot, M. (1993). Deontic logic in computer science. chap. In On the characterization of law and computer systems: The normative systems perspective (pp. 275–307). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kubicki, S., Lepreux, S., & Kolski, C. (2012). RFID-driven situation awareness on tangisense, a table interacting with tangible objects. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(8), 1079–1094.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0442-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    López y López, F., & Luck, M., (2003). Modelling norms for autonomous agents. In 4th Mexican international conference on computer science (ENC 2003), September 8–12, 2003, Apizaco, Mexico (pp. 238–245). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Merabet, G. H., Essaaidi, M., Talei, H., Abid, M. R., Khalil, N., Madkour, M., & Benhaddou, D. (2014). Applications of multi-agent systems in smart grids: A survey. In 2014 International conference on multimedia computing and systems (ICMCS) (pp. 1088–1094).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMCS.2014.6911384.
  57. 57.
    Moses, Y., & Tennenholtz, M. (1995). Artificial social systems. Computers and Artificial Intelligence, 14(6), 533–562.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Noriega, P., Chopra, A. K., Fornara, N., Cardoso, H. L., & Singh, M. P. (2013). Regulated MAS: Social perspective. In G. Andrighetto et al. [2] (pp. 93–133).  https://doi.org/10.4230/DFU.Vol4.12111.93.
  59. 59.
    Oren, N., Panagiotidi, S., Vzquez-Salceda, J., Modgil, S., Luck, M., & Miles, S. (2009). Towards a formalisation of electronic contracting environments. In J. F. Hübner, E. Matson, O. Boissier, & V. Dignum (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions and norms in agent systems IV, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 5428, pp. 156–171). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Panagiotidi, S., Álvarez-Napagao, S., & Vázquez-Salceda, J. (2013). Towards the norm-aware agent: bridging the gap between deontic specifications and practical mechanisms for norm monitoring and norm-aware planning. In Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems IX—COIN 2013 international workshops, COIN@AAMAS, St Paul, MN, USA, May 6, 2013, COIN@PRIMA, Dunedin, New Zealand, December 3, 2013, Revised Selected Papers (pp. 346–363). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Piunti, M., Boissier, O., Hübner, J. F., & Ricci, A. (2010). Embodied organizations: A unifying perspective in programming agents, organizations and environments. In Proceedings of the multi-agent logics, languages, and organisations federated workshops (MALLOW 2010), CEUR workshop proceedings (Vol. 627). CEUR-WS.org.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ricci, A., Piunti, M., & Viroli, M. (2011). Environment programming in multi-agent systems: An artifact-based perspective. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 23(2), 158–192.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-010-9140-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ruiter, D. W. (1997). A basic classification of legal institutions. Ratio Juris, 10(4), 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2003). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Searle, J. (1995). The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Searle, J. (2009). Making the social world: The structure of human civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Shoham, Y., & Tennenholtz, M. (1992). On the synthesis of useful social laws for artificial agent societies (preliminary report). In Proceedings of the 10th national conference on artificial intelligence. San Jose, CA, July 12–16, 1992 (pp. 276–281).Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Singh, M. P. (2011). Information-driven interaction-oriented programming: BSPL, the blindingly simple protocol language. In 10th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2011), Taipei, Taiwan, May 2–6, 2011 (Vols. 1–3, pp. 491–498). Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Smith, B., & Searle, J. (2003). The construction of social reality: An exchange. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 62(1), 285–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Thévin, L., Badeig, F., Dugdale, J., Boissier, O., & Garbay, C. (2015). Un système multi-agent normatif hybride pour l’interaction mixte. Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle, 29(3–4), 453–482.  https://doi.org/10.3166/ria.29.453-482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Tinnemeier, N., Dastani, M., & Meyer, J. J. (2009). Roles and norms for programming agent organizations. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems—AAMAS ’09 (Vol. 1, pp. 121–128). Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1558013.1558029.
  72. 72.
    Tinnemeier, N. A. M., Dastani, M. M., Meyer, J. J. C., & van der Torre, L. (2009). Programming normative artifacts with declarative obligations and prohibitions. In Web intelligence and intelligent agent technology, IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on (Vol. 2, pp. 145–152).  https://doi.org/10.1109/WI-IAT.2009.144.
  73. 73.
    Urovi, V., Bromuri, S., Stathis, K., & Artikis, A. (2010). Towards runtime support for norm-governed multi-agent systems. In Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference, KR 2010, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 9–13, 2010.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Viganò, F., & Colombetti, M. (2007). Specification and verification of institutions through status functions. In P. Noriega, J. Vzquez-Salceda, G. Boella, O. Boissier, V. Dignum, N. Fornara, & E. Matson (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems II, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4386, pp. 115–129). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74459-7_8.
  75. 75.
    Viganò, F., & Colombetti, M. (2008). Model checking norms and sanctions in institutions. In J. S. A. Sichman, J. Padget, S. Ossowski, & P. Noriega (Eds.), Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems III, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4870, pp. 316–329). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79003-7_23.
  76. 76.
    Vos, M. D., Balke, T., & Satoh, K. (2013). Combining event-and state-based norms. In International conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, AAMAS ’13, Saint Paul, MN, USA, May 6–10, 2013 (pp. 1157–1158). Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Weyns, D., Omicini, A., & Odell, J. (2007). Environment as a first-class abstraction in multiagent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 14(1), 5–30.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-006-0012-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wooldridge, M., & Jennings, N. (1995). Agent theories, architectures, and languages: A survey. In M. Wooldridge, & N. Jennings (Eds.), Intelligent agents: ECAI-94 workshop on agent theories, architectures, and languages Amsterdam, The Netherlands August 8–9, 1994 proceedings, lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 890, pp. 1–39). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58855-8_1.
  79. 79.
    Zatelli, M. R., & Hübner, J. F. (2012). A unified interaction model with agent, organisation, and environment. In Anais do IX Encontro Nacional de Inteligncia Artificial (ENIA@BRACIS). Curitiba.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Rio Grande do SulRolanteBrazil
  2. 2.UFSC/CTC/DAS/PPGEASFederal University of Santa CatarinaFlorianópolisBrazil
  3. 3.Laboratoire Hubert Curien UMR CNRS 5516, Institut Henri FayolMINES Saint-EtienneSaint-ÉtienneFrance

Personalised recommendations