The Role of Castes in Formal Specification of MAS

  • Hong Zhu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2132)


One of the most appealing features of multiagent technology is its natural way to modularise a complex system in terms of multiple, interacting and autonomous components. As a natural extension of classes, castes introduced in the formal specification language SLAB provide a language facility that provides modularity in the formal specification of multiagent systems. A caste represents a set of agents of common structural and behavioural characteristics. A caste description defines the tasks that the agents of the caste are capable of, the rules that govern their behaviour, and the environment that they live in. The inheritance relationship between castes defines the sub-group relationship between the agents so that special capabilities and behaviours can be introduced. The instance relationship between an agent and a caste declares that an agent is a member of a caste. This paper discuses how the caste facility can be employed to specify multiagent systems so that the notion of roles, organisational structures of agent societies, communication and, collaboration protocols etc. can be naturally represented.


Multiagent System Player Behaviour Basketball Player Basketball Game Behaviour Rule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Jennings, N. R., On agent-based software engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 117, 2000,pp277~296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhu, H. Formal Specification of Agent Behaviour through Environment Scenarios, Proc. of NASA First Workshop on Formal Aspects of Agent-Based Systems, LNCS, Springer. (In press) Also available as Technical Report, School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhu, H., SLAB: A Formal Specification Language for Agent-Based Systems, Technical Report, School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Feb. 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rao, A. S., Georgreff, M. P., Modeling Rational Agents within A BDI-Architecture, in Proc. of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1991,pp473~484.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wooldrighe, M., Reasoning About Rational Agents, The MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jennings, N. R., Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, in Multi-Agent System Engineering, Proceedings of 9th European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, Valencia, Spain, June/July 1999, Garijo, F. J, Boman, M. (eds.), LNAI Vol. 1647, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1999, pp1~7.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bauer, B., Muller, J. P., and Odell, J., Agent UML: a formalism for specifying multiagent software systems, in Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, Ciancarini, P. and Wooldridge, M. (Eds.), LNCS, Vol. 1957, Springer, 2001, pp91~103.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Odell, J., Van Dyke Parunak, H., and Bauer, B., Representing Agent interaction protocols in UML, in Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, Ciancarini, P. and Wooldridge, M. (Eds.), LNCS, Vol. 1957, Springer, 2001, pp121~140.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jennings, N. R., Wooldridge, M. J. (eds.), Agent Technology: Foundations, Applications, And Markets. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huhns, M., Singh, M. P. (eds.), Readings in Agents, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lange, D. B. and Oshima, M., Mobile agents with Java: the Aglet API, World Wide Web Journal, 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Spivey, J. M., The Z Notation: A Reference Manual, (2nd edition), Prentice Hall, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maes, P., Agents That Reduce Work And Information Overload, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 37, No. 7, 1994, pp31~40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lesperance, Y., levesque, H. J., Lin, F., Marcu, D., Reiter, R. and Scherl, R., Foundations of logical approach to agent programming, in Intelligent Agents II, Eds. Wooldridge, M., Muller, J., and Tambe, M., LNAI, Vol. 1037, Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp331~346.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jacobson, I., et al., Object-Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach, Addison-Wesley, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iglesias, C. A., Garijo, M. Gonzalez, J. C., A Survey of Agent-Oriented Methodologies, in Intelligent Agents V, Muller, J. P., Singh, M. P., Rao, A., (eds.), LNAI Vol. 1555. Springer, 1999,pp317~330.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Iglesias, C. A., Garijo, M., Gonzalez, J. C., Velasco, J. R., Analysis And Design of Multiagent Systems Using MAS-Common KADS, in Intelligent Agents IV, Singh, M. P., Rao, A., Wooldridge, M. J. (eds.), LNAI Vol. 1356, Springer, 1998, pp313~327.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moulin, B. Brassard, M., A Scenario-Based Design Method And Environment for Developing Multi-Agent Systems, in Proc. of First Australian Workshop on DAI, Lukose, D., Zhang, C. (eds.), LNAI Vol. 1087, Springer Verlag, 1996, pp216~231.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hong Zhu
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computing and Mathematical SciencesOxford Brookes UniversityHeadingtonUK

Personalised recommendations