Programming Rational Agents in a Modal Action Logic

  • Matteo Baldoni
  • Alberto Martelli
  • Viviana Patti
  • Laura Giordano

Abstract

In this paper we describe a language for reasoning about actions that can be used for modelling and for programming rational agents. We propose a modal approach for reasoning about dynamic domains in a logic programming setting. Agent behavior is specified by means of complex actions which are defined using modal inclusion axioms. The language is able to handle knowledge producing actions as well as actions which remove information. The problem of reasoning about complex actions with incomplete knowledge is tackled and the temporal projection and planning problems is addressed; more specifically, a goal directed proof procedure is defined, which allows agents to reason about complex actions and to generate conditional plans. We give a non-monotonic solution for the frame problem by making use of persistency assumptions in the context of an abductive characterization. The language has been used for implementing an adaptive web-based system.

logic-based agents modal and multimodal logic logic programming reasoning with incomplete knowledge reasoning about actions 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    ALiCE, Advanced Logic in Computing Environments, Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Torino (2001). Web site: http://www.di.unito.it/~alice.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. Baldoni, Normal multimodal logics: Automatic deduction and logic programming extension, PhD thesis, Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy (1998). Available at http://www.di.unito.it/~baldoni/.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Baldoni, Normal multimodal logics with interaction axioms, in: Labelled Deduction, eds. D. Basin, M. D'Agostino, D.M. Gabbay, S. Matthews and L. Viganò, Applied Logic Series, Vol. 17 (Kluwer Academic, 2000) pp. 33–53.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio, A. Chiarotto and V. Patti, Programming goal-driven web sites using an agent logic language, in: Proc. of the Third International Symposium on Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages, ed. I.V. Ramakrishnan, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1990, Las Vegas, NV (Springer, 2001) pp. 60–75.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio, L. Giordano, A. Martelli and V. Patti, Reasoning about communicating agents in the semantic web, in: Proc. of the 1st International Workshop on Principle and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning (PPSWR'2003), ICLP 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Mumbai, India, 2003 (Springer, to appear).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio, A. Martelli and V. Patti, Reasoning about conversation protocols in a logicbased agent language, in: AI*IA 2003: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 8th Congress of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence, eds. A. Cappelli and F. Turini, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2829, Pisa, Italy (Springer, 2003) pp. 300–311.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio, A. Martelli and V. Patti, Reasoning about self and others: communicating agents in a modal action logic, in: Proc. of Theoretical Computer Science, 8th Italian Conference, ICTCS'2003, eds. C. Blundo and C. Laneve, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2841, Bologna, Italy (Springer, 2003) pp. 228–241.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio and V. Patti, Structereless, intention-guided web sites: Planning based adaptation, in: Proc. of the 9th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCII 2001), Symposium on Human Interfaces 2001, 4th International Conference on Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, 1th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction, ed. C. Stephanidis, Vol. 3, New Orleans, LA (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001) pp. 237–241.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio and V. Patti, Applying logic inference techniques for gaining flexibility and adaptivity in tutoring systems, in: Proc. of the 10th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCII 2003), Symposium on Human Interfaces 2003, 5th International Conference on Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, 2th International Conference in Human-Computer Interaction, ed. C. Stephanidis, Vol. 4, Crete, Greece (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003) pp. 517–521.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    M. Baldoni, C. Baroglio, V. Patti and L. Torasso, Using a rational agent in an adaptive web-based tutoring system, in: Proc. of Workshop on Adaptive System for Web-based Education, 2nd Int. Conf. on Adaptve Hypermedia and Adaptive Web Based Systems (AH 2002), Selected Papers, eds. P. Brusilovsky, N. Henze and E. Millan, Malaga, Spain (2002) pp. 43–55.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. Baldoni, L. Giordano and A. Martelli, A tableau calculus for multimodal logics and some (un)decidability results, in: Proc. of TABLEAUX'98, ed. H. de Swart, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1397 (Springer, 1998) pp. 44–59.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Baldoni, L. Giordano, A. Martelli and V. Patti, An abductive proof procedure for reasoning about actions in modal logic programming, in: Proc. of NMELP'96, eds. J. Dix et al., Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1216 (Springer, 1997) pp. 132–150.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    C. Baral and T.C. Son, Approximate reasoning about actions in presence of sensing and incomplete information, in: Proc. of ILPS'97, ed. J. Mauszyński (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997) pp. 387–404.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    C. Baral and T.C. Son, Formalizing sensing actions-A transition function based approach, Artificial Intelligence 125(1-2) (2001) 19–91.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    P. Brusilovsky, Adaptive hypermedia, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 11 (2001) 87–110.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    M. Castilho, O. Gasquet and A. Herzig, Modal tableaux for reasoning about actions and plans, in: Proc. ECP'97, ed. S. Steel, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (1997) pp. 119–130.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G. De Giacomo, L. Iocchi, Daniele Nardi and Riccardo Rosati, Moving a robot: The KR & R approach at work, in: Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'96), eds. L.C. Aiello, J. Doyle and S.C. Shapiro (Morgan Kaufmann, Cambridge, MA, 1996) pp. 198–209.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    G. De Giacomo, L. Iocchi, D. Nardi and R. Rosati, Planning with sensing for a mobile robot, in: Recent Advances in AI Planning, 4th European Conference on Planning, ECP'97, eds. S. Steel and R. Alami, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1348, Toulouse, France (Springer, 1997) pp. 156–168.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    G. De Giacomo and M. Lenzerini, PDL-based framework for reasoning about actions, in: Proc. of AI*IA '95, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 992 (1995) pp. 103–114.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    G. De Giacomo, Y. Lespérance and H.J. Levesque, Reasoning about concurrent execution, prioritized interrupts, and exogenous actions in the situation calculus, in: Proc. of IJCAI'97, Nagoya (August 1997) pp. 1221–1226.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    G. De Giacomo and H.J. Levesque, An incremental interpreter for high-level programs with sensing, in: Proc. of the AAAI 1998 Fall Symposium on Cognitive Robotics, Orlando, FL (October 1998).Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    G. De Giacomo and R. Rosati, Minimal knowledge approach to reasoning about actions and sensing, in: Proc. of the IJCAI'99 Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Action and Change (NRAC'99), Stockholm, Sweden (August 1999) pp. 25–31.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    M. Denecker and D. De Schreye, Representing incomplete knowledge in abduction logic programming, in: Proc. of ILPS '93 (MIT Press, Vancouver, 1993).Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    F. Dignum and M. Greaves, Issues in agent communication, in: Issues in Agent Communication, eds. F. Dignum and M. Greaves, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1916 (Springer, 2000) pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    K. Eshghi and R. Kowalski, Abduction compared with negation by failure, in: Proc. of ICLP '89 (MIT Press, Lisbon, 1989).Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    FIPA, Fipa 97, specification part 2: Agent communication language. Technical report, FIPA (Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents) (November 1997). Available at: http://www.fipa.org/.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz, Representing action and change by logic programs, Journal of Logic Programming 17 (1993) 301–321.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    G. De Giacomo, Y. Lespérance, H.J. Levesque and S. Sardina, On the semantic of deliberation in Indigolog: from theory to implementation, in: Proc. of KR 2002 (2002) pp. 603–614.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    L. Giordano, A. Martelli and C. Schwind, Ramification and causality in a modal action logic, Journal of Logic and Computation 10(5) (2000) 625–662.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    D. Harel, Dynamic logic, in: Handbook of Philosophical Logic, eds. D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, Vol. II (D. Reidel, 1984) pp. 497–604.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    S. Hölldobler and H.P. Störr, Reasoning about complex actions, in: Proc. of NMR'98-Action and Causality, ed. V. Lifschitz (1998) pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    G.E. Hughes and M.J. Cresswell, A New Introduction to Modal Logic (Routledge, 1996).Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    H.J. Levesque,What is planning in the presence of sensing? in: Proc. of the AAAI-96 (1996) pp. 1139–1146.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    H.J. Levesque, R. Reiter, Y. Lespérance, F. Lin and R.B. Scherl, GOLOG: A logic programming language for dynamic domains, J. of Logic Programming 31 (1997) 59–83.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    J. Lobo, G. Mendez and S.R. Taylor, Adding knowledge to the action description language A, in: Proc. of AAAI'97/IAAI'97, Menlo Park (1997) pp. 454–459.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    V. Patti, Programming rational agents: A modal approach in a logic programming setting, PhD thesis, Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy (2002). Available at http://www.di.unito.it/~patti/.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    R.P.A. Petrick and F. Bacchus, A knowledge-based approach to planning with incomplete information and sensing, in: 6th AI Planning and Scheduling Conference, AIPS 2002, Toulouse (2002).Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    H. Prendinger and G. Schurz, Reasoning about action and change. A dynamic logic approach, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 5(2) (1996) 209–245.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    F. Sadri, F. Toni and P. Torroni, Dialogues for negotiation: Agent varieties and dialogue sequences, in: Proc. of ATAL'01, Seattle, WA (2001).Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    R. Scherl and H.J. Levesque, The frame problem and knowledge-producing actions, in: Proc. of the AAAI-93, Washington, DC (1993) pp. 689–695.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    C.B. Schwind, A logic based framework for action theories, in: Language, Logic and Computation, eds. J. Ginzburg et al. (CSLI, 1997) pp. 275–291.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    M. Thielscher, Representing the knowledge of a robot, in: Proc. of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and reasoning, KR'00 (Morgan Kaufmann, 2000) pp. 109–120.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Baldoni
    • 1
  • Alberto Martelli
    • 1
  • Viviana Patti
    • 1
  • Laura Giordano
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di TorinoTorinoItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi del Piemonte OrientaleAlessandriaItaly

Personalised recommendations