Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Agent communication and artificial institutions

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we propose an application-independent model for the definition of artificial institutions that can be used to define open multi-agent systems. Such a model of institutional reality makes us able also to define an objective and external semantics of a commitment-based Agent Communication Language (ACL). In particular we propose to regard an ACL as a set of conventions to act on a fragment of institutional reality, defined in the context of an artificial institution. Another contribution of the work presented in this paper is an operational definition of norms, a crucial component of artificial institutions. In fact in open systems interacting agents might not conform to the specifications. We regard norms as event-driven rules that when are fired by events happening in the system create or cancel a set of commitments. An interesting aspect of our proposal is that both the definition of the ACL and the definition of norms are based on the same notion of commitment. Therefore an agent capable of reasoning on commitments can reason on the semantics of communicative acts and on the system of norms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Amgoud L., Maudet N. and Parsons S. (2002). An argumentation-based semantics for agent communication languages. In: Harmelen, F.V. (eds) Proceedings of the European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI-2002), pp 38–42. IOS Press, Lyon, France

    Google Scholar 

  2. Artikis, A., Kamara, L., Pitt, J., & Sergot, M.J. (2004). A Protocol for resource sharing in norm-governed Ad Hoc networks. In J.A. Leite, A. Omicini, P. Torroni & P. Yolum (Eds.), Declarative agent languages and technologies II (DALT 2004), Vol. 3476 of LNCS (pp. 221–238). Springer, Germany.

  3. Artikis A., Pitt J. and Sergot M. (2002). Animated specifications of computational societies. In: Castelfranchi, C. and Johnson, W.L. (eds) Proceedings of the first international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-02), pp 1053–1062. ACM, Bologna, Italy

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Barbuceanu M., Gray T. and Mankovski S. (1998). Coordinating with obligations. In: Sycara, K.P. and Wooldridge, M. (eds) Proceedings of the second international conference on autonomous agents (Agents’98), pp 62–69. ACM, New York, USA

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., & Chaib-draa, B. (2004). Commitment and argument network: a new formalism for agent communication. In F. Dignum (Ed.), Advances in agent communication, international workshop on agent communication languages, ACL 2003, Melbourne, 2003, Vol. 2922 of LNCS. (pp. 146–165). Melbourne. Springer.

  6. Booch G., Rumbaugh J. and Jacobson I. (1999). The unified modeling language user guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MAS, USA

    Google Scholar 

  7. Castelfranchi C. (1995). Commitments: from individual intentions to groups and organizations. In: Lesser, V. (eds) Proceedings of the first international conference on multi-agent systems, pp 528–535. MIT press, San Francisco, Cambridge, USA

    Google Scholar 

  8. Colombetti, M. (2000). A commitment-based approach to agent speech acts and conversations. In Proceedings of the workshop on agent languages and communication policies, 4th international conference on autonomous agents (Agents 2000) (pp. 21–29). Barcelona, Spain: Springer.

  9. Colombetti, M., Fornara, N., & Verdicchio, M. (2004). A social approach to communication in multiagent systems. In J.A. Leite, A. Omicini, L. Sterling, & P. Torroni (Eds.), Declarative agent languages and technologies I, Vol. 2990 of LNAI (pp. 191–220). Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Colombetti M. and Verdicchio M. (2002). An analysis of agent speech acts as institutional actions. In: Castelfranchi, C. and Johnson, W.L. (eds) Proceedings of the first international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-02), pp 1157–1166. ACM, Bologna, Italy

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Dignum, F., & Royakkers, L. (1998). Collective obligation and commitment. In In proceedings of fifth international conference on law in the information society. Florence, Italy.

  12. Esteva, M., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A., Sierra, C., Garcia, P., & Arcos, J.L. (2001). On the formal specification of electronic institutions. In F. Dignum, & C. Sierra (Eds.), Agent mediated electronic commerce, the european agentlink perspective, Vol: 1991 of LNAI (pp. 126–147). Berlin: Springer.

  13. Esteva M., Rodríguez-Aguilar J.A., Sierra C., Vasconcelos W. (2004). Verifying norm consistency in electronic institutions. In: Dignum V., Corkill D., Jonker C., Dignum F. (eds) Proceedings of the AAAI-04 workshop on agent organizations: theory and practice. (pp. 8–15). San Jose, CAL, USA. 8–15.

  14. Finin T., Labrou Y., Mayfield J. (1997). KQML as an agent communication language. In: Bradshaw J.M. (eds) Software agents. Chap.14, pp. 291–316. AAAI Press Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  15. Flores, R., Pasquier, P., & Chaib-draa, B. (2006). Conversational semantics with social commitments. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 10.1007/s10458-006-0011-1.

  16. Fornara N. and Colombetti M. (2002). Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Castelfranchi, C. and Johnson, W.L. (eds) Proceedings of the first international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-02), pp 535–542. Springer, Bologna, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fornara N. and Colombetti M. (2003). Defining interaction protocols using a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Rosenschein, J.S., Sandholm, T., Wooldridge, M. and Yokoo, M. (eds) Proceedings of the second international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-03), pp 520–527. ACM, Melbourne, Australia

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Fornara N. and Colombetti M. (2004). A commitment-based approach to agent communication. Applied Artificial Intelligence an International Journal 18(9–10): 853–866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fornara, N., Viganò, F., & Colombetti, M. (2004). Agent communication and institutional reality (extended version). Technical Report1, Institute for Communication Technologies, Università della Svizzera Italiana.

  20. Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (2001). FIPA english auction interaction protocol specification. http://www.fipa.org.

  21. Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (2002). FIPA communicative act library specification.http://www.fipa.org.

  22. Grossi, D., Aldewereld, H., Vazquez-Salceda, J., & Dignum, F. (2005). Ontological aspects of the implementation of norms in agent-based electronic institutions. In Proceedings of NorMAS’05, First International Symposium on Normative Multiagent Systems. Hatfield, UK.

  23. Jones A. and Sergot M.J. (1996). A Formal characterisation of institutionalised power. Journal of the IGPL 4(3): 429–445

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Kagal, L., & Finin, T. (2006). Modeling conversation policies using permissions and obligations. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, in press.

  25. Lopezy Lopez F. and Luck M. (2003). Modelling norms for autonomous agents. In: Chavez, E., Favela, J., Mejia, M. and Oliart, A. (eds) Proceedings of fourth mexican international conference on computer science, pp 238–245. IEEE Computer Society, CA

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Mallya, A.U., & Singh, M.P. (2006). An algebra for commitment protocols. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 10.1007/s10458-006-7232-1.

  27. McBurney P. and Parsons S. (2003). Posit spaces: a performative model of e-commerce. In: Rosenschein, J.S., Sandholm, T., Wooldridge, M. and Yokoo, M. (eds) Proceedings of the second international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-03), pp 624–631. ACM, NY

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Moses Y. and Tennenholtz M. (1995). Artificial social systems. Computers and AI 14(6): 533–562

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Object Management Group, OMG (2003). Object constraint languagespecification 1.4. http://www.omg.org/.

  30. Searle J.R. (1969). Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  31. Searle J.R. (1995). The construction of social reality. Free Press, NewYork

    Google Scholar 

  32. Searle J.R. and Vanderveken D. (1984). Foundations of illocutionary logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  33. Singh M.P. (1999). An ontology for commitments in multiagent systems: toward a unification of normative concepts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7: 97–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Singh M.P. (2000). A social semantics for agent communication languages. In: Dignum, F. and Greaves, M. (eds) Issues in agent communication, pp 31–45. Springer, Stockholm

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Vazquez, J., & Dignum, F. (2003). Modelling electronic organizations. In V. Marik, J. Muller, & M. Pechoucek. (Eds.), Multi-agent systems and applications III, Vol. 2691 of LNAI (pp. 584–593) Germany: springer.

  36. Verdicchio M., Colombetti M. (2003). A logical model of social commitment for agent communication. In: Rosenschein J.S., Sandholm T., Wooldridge M., Yokoo M. (eds) Proceedings of the second international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS-03) pp. (528–535). Melbourne, Australia,

  37. Viganó, F., Fornara, N., Colombetti, M. (2006). An event driven approach to norms in artificial institutions. In O. Boissier, J. Padget, V. Dignum, G. Lindemann, E. Matson, S. Ossowski, J. Simao Sichman, & J. Vazquez-Salceda (Eds.) Proceedings of ANIREM05 (pp. 142–154). LNAI, Vol. 3913. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

  38. Viroli, M., & Ricci, A. (2005). Agent interaction semantics by timed operating instructions. In R.M. van Eijk, M. Huget, & F. Dignum (Eds.), Agent communication, international workshop on agent communication, AC 2004, July 19, 2004, Revised Selected and Invited Papers, Vol. 3396 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 173–192). New York, NY, USA.

  39. Walton D.N. and Krabbe C.W. (1995). Commitment in dialogue: basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. SUNY Press, Albany, NY

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Università della Svizzera italiana, via G. Buffi 13, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland

    Nicoletta Fornara, Francesco Viganò & Marco Colombetti

  2. Politecnico di Milano, piazza Leonardo Da Vinci 32, Milano, Italy

    Marco Colombetti

Authors
  1. Nicoletta Fornara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesco Viganò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Colombetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicoletta Fornara.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fornara, N., Viganò, F. & Colombetti, M. Agent communication and artificial institutions. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 14, 121–142 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-006-0017-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-006-0017-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation