Supporting Request Acceptance with Use Policies

  • Thomas C. King
  • M. Birna van Riemsdijk
  • Virginia Dignum
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9372)


This paper deals with the problem of automating the contribution of resources owned by people to do work for others. This is by providing a means for owners of resources to maintain autonomy over how, when and to whom their resources are used with the specification of use policies governing resources. We give representations of requests for resource usage as a set of conditional norms and a use policy as specifying what norms should and should not be imposed on a resource (i.e. a set of meta-norms). Our main contribution is a reasoner built on the Event Calculus, that detects conflicts between requests and use policies, determining whether the request can be accepted.


Operational Semantic Mobile Sensor Conditional Norm Event Calculus Axiom State 
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.



Thomas C. King—supported by the SHINE ( project of TU Delft. Authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers of COIN-14 for their helpful comments.


  1. 1.
    Andrighetto, G., Governatori, G., Noriega, P., van der Torre, L.: Normative multi-agent systems. Dagstuhl Follow-Ups 4, 135–170 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Artikis, A., Sergot, M., Paliouras, G.: Run-time composite event recognition. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems, pp. 69–80. ACM Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boella, G., van der Torre, L.: Permissions and obligations in hierarchical normative systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 109–118 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: A logic-based, reactive calculus of events. Fundamenta Informaticae 105(1–2), 135–161 (2010)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Representing and monitoring social commitments using the event calculus. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 27(1), 85–130 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chittaro, L., Montanari, A.: Efficient temporal reasoning in the cached event calculus. Comput. Intell. 12(3), 359–382 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dignum, V.: A model for organizational interaction: based on agents, founded in logic. Ph.D. thesis. University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gabbay, D., Horty, J., Parent, X., van der Meyden, R., van der Torre, L. (eds.): Handbook of Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, vol. 1. College Publications, London (2013)MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ganti, R., Ye, F., Lei, H.: Mobile crowdsensing: current state and future challenges. IEEE Commun. Mag. 49(11), 32–39 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Governatori, G.: Representing business contracts in RuleML. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 14(2–3), 181–216 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Günay, A., Yolum, P.: Detecting conflicts in commitments. In: Sakama, C., Sardina, S., Vasconcelos, W., Winikoff, M. (eds.) DALT 2011. LNCS, vol. 7169, pp. 51–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hübner, J., Sichman, J.S., Boissier, O.: A model for the structural, functional, and deontic specification of organizations in multiagent systems. In: Bittencourt, G., Ramalho, G.L. (eds.) Advances in Artificial Intelligence. LNCS 2507, 118–128 (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    King, T.C., Liu, Q., Polevoy, G., de Weerdt, M., Dignum, V., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Warnier, M.: Request driven social sensing (demonstration). In: Lomuscio, A., Scerri, P., Bazzan, A., Huhns, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2014), Paris, France (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kowalski, R., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. New Gener. Comput. 4(1), 67–95 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    López, FLy, Luck, M., D’Inverno, M.: A normative framework for agent-based systems. Comput. Math. Org. Theor. 12(2–3), 227–250 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parent, X., van der Torre, L.: Input/output logic. In: Gabbay, D., Horty, J., Parent, X., van der Meyden, R., van der Torre, L. (eds.) Handbook of Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, vol. 1, pp. 499–544. College Publications, London (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shanahan, M.: The event calculus explained. In: Veloso, M.M., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence Today. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1600, pp. 409–430. Springer, Heidelberg (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dennis, L.A., Fisher, M., Hindriks, K.V.: Agent reasoning for norm compliance a semantic approach. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2013), pp. 499–506, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vasconcelos, W.W., Kollingbaum, M.J., Norman, T.J.: Normative conflict resolution in multi-agent systems. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 19(2), 124–152 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wansing, H.: Nested deontic modalities: another view of parking on highways. Erkenntnis 49(2), 185–199 (1998)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yolum, P., Singh, M.: Reasoning about commitments in the event calculus: an approach for specifying and executing protocols. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 42(1–3), 227–253 (2004)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Flexible protocol specification and execution: applying event calculus planning using commitments. First Int. Joint Conf. Auton. Agents Multiagent Syst. Part 2, 527–534 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas C. King
    • 1
  • M. Birna van Riemsdijk
    • 1
  • Virginia Dignum
    • 1
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
    • 1
  1. 1.TU DelftDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations