Formalizing tool use in intelligent environments

  • Daghan L. AcayEmail author
  • Liz Sonenberg
  • Gil Tidhar
Original Research


A concept of capability in multi-agent systems that incorporates a notion of tools that are available to an agent in the environment is formalised. Using tools as the realisation of external capability requires less theoretical apparatus than modelling the interaction between agents. The contribution of this paper is a formal BDI logic for expressing and manipulating properties of rational tool-using agents, termed here as extrospective agents. The logic is based on separating the agent actions and tool operations to manage the complexity of agent-agent and agent-environment interactions.


Capability BDI logic Tool Functionality 


  1. Acay DL, Sonenberg L, Ricci A, Pasquier P (2008a) How situated is your agent? A cognitive perspective. In: Hindriks KV, Pokahr A, Sardiña S (eds) ProMAS 2008, Portugal. Revised invited and selected papers, vol 5442 of LNCS, pp 136–151. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  2. Acay DL, Tidhar G, Sonenberg L (2008b) Extending agent capabilities: tools vs. agents. In: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent technology, Sydney, Australia, 2008, pp 259–265. IEEE Computer SocietyGoogle Scholar
  3. Acay DL, Pasquier P, Sonenberg L (2007) Extrospection: Agents reasoning about the environment. In The 3rd international conference on intelligent environments, Ulm, Germany, pp 220–227. IEEGoogle Scholar
  4. Acay LD (2010) Reasoning with the Environment Through Extrospection. PhD thesis, University of Melbourne, Department of Information SystemsGoogle Scholar
  5. Behrens TM, Hindriks KV, Dix J (2011) Towards an environment interface standard for agent platforms. Ann Math Artif Intell 61(4):261–295CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Bratman ME (1988) Intentions, plans, and practical reasoning. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Casbeer D, Kingston D, Beard R, McLain T (2006) Cooperative forest fire surveillance using a team of small unmanned air vehicles. Int J Syst Sci 37(6):351–360CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Chaib A, Boussebough I, Chaoui A (2017) Adaptive service composition in an ambient environment with a multi-agent system. J Ambient Intell Hum Comput 6:1–14Google Scholar
  9. Cheng BHC, de Lemos R, Giese H, Inverardi P, Magee J, Andersson J, Becker B, Bencomo N, Brun Y, Cukic B, Di Marzo Serugendo G, Dustdar S, Finkelstein A, Gacek C, Geihs K, Grassi V, Karsai G, Kienle HM, Kramer J, Litoiu M, Malek S, Mirandola R, Müller HA, Park S, Shaw M, Tichy M, Tivoli M, Weyns D, Whittle J (2009) Software engineering for self-adaptive systems: a research roadmap. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–26. ISBN 978-3-642-02161-9
  10. Cohen PR, Levesque HJ (1990) Intention is choice with commitment. Artif Intell 42(2–3):213–261MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Cossentino M, Sabatucci L, Seidita V (2017) Towards an approach for engineering complex systems: agents and agility. In: De Meo P, Postorino MN, Rosaci D, Sarné GML (eds) Proceedings of the 18th Workshp “From Objects to Agents”, vol 1867 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pp 1–6. CEUR-WS.orGoogle Scholar
  12. de Weerdt M, Bos A, Tonino H, Witteveen C (2003) A resource logic for multi-agent plan merging. Ann Math Artif Intell 37(1):93–130MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. (2016) Function definition. Accessed15 May 2016
  14. Dziubiński M, Verbrugge R et al (2007) Complexity issues in multiagent logics. Fund Inf 75(1–4):239–262MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Emerson EA (1990) Temporal and modal logic. In: Handbook of theoretical computer science. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp 995–1072Google Scholar
  16. Klügl F (2016) Using the affordance concept for model design in agent-based simulation. Ann Math Artif Intell 78(1):21–44MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McCarthy J (1990) Ascribing mental qualities to machines. In: Formalizing common sense. Ablex, pp 161–195Google Scholar
  18. McDermott D (1982) A temporal logic for reasoning about processes and plans. Cognit Sci 6(2):101–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Meyer JJ, Broersen J, Herzig A (2015) BDI logics. In: van Ditmarsch H, Halpern JY, van der Hoek W, Kooi BP (eds) Handbook of epistemic logic. College Publications, UK, pp 453–498Google Scholar
  20. Modoni G, Veniero M, Trombetta A, Sacco M, Clemente S (2017) Semantic based events signaling for AAL systems. JAIHC. Springer, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  21. Moore RC (1985) A formal theory of knowledge and action. Formal theories of the commonsense world. Ablex, Norwood, pp 319–358Google Scholar
  22. Odell JJ, Van Dyke Parunak H, Fleischer M, Brueckner S (2003) Modeling agents and their environment. Agent-oriented software engineering III. Springer, Berlin, pp 16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Omicini A, Ricci A, Viroli M (2008) Artifacts in the A&A meta-model for multiagent systems. Autonom Agents Multi Agent Syst 17(3):432–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Omicini A, Ricci A, Viroli M, Castelfranchi C, Tummolini L (2004) Coordination artifacts: Environment based coordination for intelligent agents. In: Proceedings of the third international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems , vol 1. IEEE, pp 286–293Google Scholar
  25. Omicini A, Ricci A, Viroli M (2006) Agens Faber: Toward a theory of artefacts for MAS. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 150(3):21–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Padgham L, Lambrix P (2005) Formalisations of capabilities for BDI-Agents. Autonom Agents Multi Agent Syst 10(3):249–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rand A (1990) Introduction to objectivist epistemology. New American Library, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
  28. Rao AS, Georgeff MP (1998a) Decision procedures for BDI logics. J Logic Comput 8(3):293–343MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Rao AS, Georgeff MP (1998b) Modeling rational agents with a BDI-architecture. In: Huhns MN, Singh MP (eds) Readings in agents. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Mateo, CA, USA, pp 317–328. ISBN 1-55860-495-2Google Scholar
  30. Ricci A, Piunti M, Viroli M (2009a) Externalisation and internalization: a new perspective on agent modularisation in multi-agent system programming. In: Dastani M et al (eds) Languages, methodologies, and development tools for multi-agent systems, LADS revised selected papers, vol 6039 of LNCS. Springer, pp 35–54Google Scholar
  31. Ricci A, Piunti M, Viroli M (2011) Environment programming in multi-agent systems: an artifact-based perspective. Autonom Agents Multi Agent Syst 23(2):158–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ricci A, Piunti M, Viroli M, Omicini A (2009b) Environment programming in cartago. In: El Fallah Seghrouchni A, Dix J, Dastani M, Bordini RH (eds) Multi-agent programming. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 259–288Google Scholar
  33. Russell SJ, Norvig P (2003) Artificial intelligence, a modern approach. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  34. Savaglio C, Fortino G, Ganzha M, Paprzycki M, Bădică C, Ivanović M (2018) Agent-based computing in the internet of things: a survey. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 307–320. ISBN 978-3-319-66379-1
  35. Stoytchev A (2005) Behavior-grounded representation of tool affordances. In: International conference on robotics and automation. IEEE, pp 3060–3065 (2005)Google Scholar
  36. Tarkoma S, Laukkanen M (2003) Adaptive agent-based service composition for wireless terminals. In: Klusch M, Omicini A, Ossowski S, Laamanen H (eds) 7th International workshop, CIA 2003, Helsinki, Finland. Proceedings. Springer, pp 16–29Google Scholar
  37. Torroni P (2004) Computational logic in multi-agent systems: recent advances and future directions. Ann Math Artif Intell 42(1):293–305MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. van Linder B, van der Hoek W, Meyer JJC (1998) Formalising abilities and opportunities of agents. Fundamenta Informaticae 34(1–2):53–101MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Wobcke W (2015) A logic of intention and action for regular BDI agents based on bisimulation of agent programs. Autonom Agents Multi Agent Syst 29(4):569–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wooldridge M (2000) Reasoning about rational agents. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computing and Information SystemsThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations