Advertisement

Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 141–154 | Cite as

Reactive Mobility by Failure: When Fail Means Move

  • Alejandro Zunino
  • Marcelo Campo
  • Cristian Mateos
Article

Abstract

Mobile agent development is mainly supported by Java-based platforms and tools. However, the weak mobility model they use, the lack of adequate support for developing inference and reasoning mechanisms, added to the inherent complexity of building location-aware software, impose strong limitations for developing mobile intelligent agent systems. In this article we present MoviLog, a platform for building Prolog-based mobile agents with a strong mobility model. MoviLog is an extension of JavaLog, an integration of Java and Prolog, that allows us to take advantage of the best features of the programming paradigms they represent. MoviLog agents, called Brainlets, are able to migrate among different Web sites, either proactively or reactively, to use the available knowledge in order to find a solution. The major contribution of MoviLog is its Reactive Mobility by Failure (RMF) mechanism. RMF is a mechanism that acts when an agent needs a resource or service that is not available at the current executing site. RMF uses a distributed multi-agent system to transparently transport the executing agent to the site where the resource/service is available, thus reducing the development effort with respect to the traditional mobile agent approach, while maintaining its advantages.

Keywords

mobility mobile agents intelligent agents logic programming 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amandi A, Zunino A, Iturregui R. Multi-paradigm languages supporting multi-agent development. In Garijo FJ, Boman M, eds. Multi-Agent System Engineering, volume 1647 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Valencia, Spain: Springer-Verlag, 1999, 128–139.Google Scholar
  2. Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, Lassila O. The semantic Web. Scientific American 2001;284(5):34–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bradshaw, JM. Software Agents. Menlo Park, USA: AAAI Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  4. Crnogorac L, Rao AS, Kotagiri Ramamohanarao. Analysis of inheritance mechanisms in agent-oriented programming. In Proc. of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1997; 647–654.Google Scholar
  5. Dix J. The Logic programming paradigm. AI Communications 1998;11(3):39–43. Short version in Newsletter of ALP, Vol. 11(3), 1998, pp. 10–14.Google Scholar
  6. Fayad ME, Johnson R, eds. Domain-Specific Application Frameworks: Frameworks Experience by Industry. Wiley & Sons, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. Fisher M. A survey of concurrent METATEM—the language and its applications. In: Gabbay DM, Ohlbach HJ, eds. Temporal Logic—Proceedings of the First International Conference (LNAI Volume 827). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1994;480–505.Google Scholar
  8. Fünfrocken S, Mattern F. Mobile agents as an architectural concept for internet-based distributed applications—the WASP project Approach. In: Proceedings of KiVS’99 (Kommunikation in VerteiltenSystemen). Springer-Verlag, 1999:32–43Google Scholar
  9. Garcia A, Chavez C, Silva O, Silva V, Lucena C. Promoting advanced Separation of Concerns in Intra-Agent and Inter-Agent Software Engineering. In: Workshop on Advanced Separation of Concerns in Object-Oriented Systems at OOPSLA’2001, 2001Google Scholar
  10. Genesereth MR, Ketchpel SP. Software agents. Communications of the ACM 1994;37(7):48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gottlob G, Koch C, Pichler R. XPath processing in a nutshell. SIGMOD 2003;32(2):21–27.Google Scholar
  12. Gray RS, Cybenko G, Kotz D, Rus D. Mobile agents: Motivations and state of the art. In: Bradshaw J. ed. Handbook of Agent Technology. AAAI/MIT Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  13. Gray RS, Kotz D, Cybenko G, Rus D. D’A gents: Security in a multiple-language, mobile-agent system. In: Vigna G, ed. Mobile Agents and Security, volume 1419 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 1998;154–187.Google Scholar
  14. Haridi S, Van Roy P, Smolka G. An overview of the design of Distributed Oz. In: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Parallel Symbolic Computation (PASCO ‘97). Maui, Hawaii, USA: ACM Press, 1997;176–187.Google Scholar
  15. Hendler J. Agents and the semantic web. IEEE Intelligent Systems 2001;16(2):30–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lange DB, Oshima M. Programming and Deploying Mobile Agents with Java Aglets. Reading, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. Lange DB, Oshima M. Seven good reasons for mobile agents. Communications of the ACM 1999;42(3):88–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee JHM, Pun PKC. Object logic integration: A multiparadigm design methodology and a programming language. Computer Languages 1997;23(1):25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McIlraith S, Son TC, Zeng H. Semantic web services. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on the Semantic Web 2001;16(2):46–53.Google Scholar
  20. Ng KW, Huang L, Sun Y. A multiparadigm language for developing agent-oriented applications. In: Proceedings of Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems (TOOLS). Beijing, China: IEEE, 1998.Google Scholar
  21. Nilsson U, Maluszynaski J. Logic, Programming and Prolog. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1995.Google Scholar
  22. Noda I, Nakashima H, Handa K. Programming language Gaea and its application for multiagent systems. In: Workshop on Multi-Agent System and Logic Programming, 1999.Google Scholar
  23. Nwana H. Software agents: An overview. Knowledge Engineering Review 1996;11(3):205–244.Google Scholar
  24. Picco G. μCode: A lightweight and flexible Mobile Code Toolkit. In: Rothermel K, Hohl F, eds. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Mobile Agents, volume 1477 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1998;160–171.Google Scholar
  25. Picco GP, Carzaniga A, Vigna G. Designing distributed applications with mobile code paradigms. In: Taylor R, ed. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Engineering, ACM Press, 1997;22–32.Google Scholar
  26. Shoham Y. An overview of agent-oriented programming. In: Bradshaw JM, ed. Software Agents, chapter 13. AAAI Press/The MIT Press, 1997;271–290Google Scholar
  27. Silva A, Romao A, Deugo D, Mira da Silva M. Towards a reference Model for Surveying Mobile Agent Systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2001;4(3):187–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Suri N, Bradshaw JM, Breedy MR, Groth PT, Hill GA, Jeffers R, Mitrovich TS. An overview of the NOMADS mobile Agent System. In: 6th ECOOP Workshop on Mobile Object Systems: Operating System Support, Security and Programming Languages, 2000.Google Scholar
  29. Tarau P. Jinni: A lightweight java-based logic engine for internet programming. In: Sagonas K, ed. Proceedings of JICSLP’98 Implementation of LP languages Workshop, Manchester, U.K. invited talk, 1998.Google Scholar
  30. Tripathi AR, Karnik NM, Ahmed T, Singh RD, Prakash A, Kakani V, Vora MK, Pathak M. Design of the ajanta System for Mobile Agent Programming. Journal of Systems and Software 2002 (to appear).Google Scholar
  31. Van Roy P, Haridi S. Mozart: A programming system for agent applications. In: International Workshop on Distributed and Internet Programming with Logic and Constraint Languages. Part of International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 99), 1999.Google Scholar
  32. Vaughan-Nichols SJ. Web services: Beyond the hype. Computer 2002;35(2):18–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wagner C, Turban E. Are intelligent e-commerce agents partners or predators? Communications of the ACM 2002;45(5):84–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yamazaki K, Yoshida M, Amagai Y, Takeuchi I. Implementation of logic computation in a multi-paradigm language TAO. Information Processing Society of Japan 2001;41(1).Google Scholar
  35. Zunino A, Berdún L, Amandi A. Javalog: Un lenguaje para la programaciûn de agentes. Inteligencia Artificial, Revista Iberoamericana de I.A. 2001;3(13):94–99. ISSN 1337-3601.Google Scholar
  36. Zunino A, Campo M, Mateos C. Simplifying mobile agent development through reactive mobility by failure. In: Bittencourt G, Ramalho G, eds. Proceedings of the 16th Brazilian Symposium on Artificial Intelligence (SBIA’02), volume 2507 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 2002;163–174.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alejandro Zunino
    • 1
  • Marcelo Campo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Cristian Mateos
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.ISISTAN Research InstituteUNICEN UniversityTandilArgentina
  2. 2.National Council for Scientific and Technical Research of Argentina (CONICET)Argentina
  3. 3.Council for Scientific Research of Buenos Aires, Argentina (CIC).Argentina

Personalised recommendations