Advertisement

CAMP-BDI: A Pre-emptive Approach for Plan Execution Robustness in Multiagent Systems

  • Alan White
  • Austin Tate
  • Michael Rovatsos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9387)

Abstract

Belief-Desire-Intention agents in realistic environments may face unpredictable exogenous changes threatening intended plans and debilitative failure effects that threaten reactive recovery. In this paper we present the CAMP-BDI (Capability Aware, Maintaining Plans) approach, where BDI agents utilize introspective reasoning to modify intended plans in avoidance of anticipated failure. We also describe an extension of this approach to the distributed case, using a decentralized process driven by structured messaging. Our results show significant improvements in goal achievement over a reactive failure recovery mechanism in a stochastic environment with debilitative failure effects, and suggest CAMP-BDI offers a valuable complementary approach towards agent robustness.

Keywords

Multiagent teamwork Belief-desire-intention Planning Capability Robustness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bordini, R.H., Hübner, J.F.: BDI agent programming in agentspeak using jason (tutorial paper). In: Toni, F., Torroni, P. (eds.) CLIMA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3900, pp. 143–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boutilier, C., Dearden, R.: Using abstractions for decision theoretic planning with time constraints. In: Proceedings of the 12th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1016–1022. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA (1994)Google Scholar
  3. Braubach, L., Pokahr, A., Moldt, D., Lamersdorf, W.: Goal representation for BDI agent systems. In: Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., El Fallah Seghrouchni, A. (eds.) PROMAS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3346, pp. 44–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. desJardins, M.E., Durfee, E.H., Ortiz, C.L. Jr., Wolverton, M.J.: A Survey of Research in Distributed, Continual Planning (2000)Google Scholar
  5. Dhirendra, S., Sebastian, S., Lin, P., Airiau, S.: Learning context conditions for BDI plan selection. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2010, Vol. 1, pp. 325–332, Richland, SC. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2010)Google Scholar
  6. Drabble, B., Dalton, J., Tate, A.: Repairing plans on-the-fly. In: Proceedings of the NASA Workshop on Planning and Scheduling for Space (1997)Google Scholar
  7. Duff, S., Harland, J., Thangarajah, J.: On proactivity and maintenance goals. In: AAMAS 2006, pp. 1033–1040 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. Fox, M., Gerevini, A., Long, D., Serina, I.: Plan stability: replanning versus plan repair. In: Proc. ICAPS, pp. 212–221. AAAI Press (2006)Google Scholar
  9. He, L., Ioerger, T.R.: A quantitative model of capabilities in multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IC-AI 2003, vol. 2, pp. 730–736, June 23–26, 2003, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  10. Hindriks, K.V., van Riemsdijk, M.B.: Satisfying maintenance goals. In: Baldoni, M., Son, T.C., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Winikoff, M. (eds.) DALT 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4897, pp. 86–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Komenda, A., Novák, P., Pechoucek, M.: Domain-independent multi-agent plan repair. J. Network and Computer Applications 37, 76–88 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lesser, V., Decker, K., Wagner, T., Carver, N., Garvey, A., Horling, B., Neiman, D., Podorozhny, R., Prasad, M.N., Raja, A., Vincent, R., Xuan, P., Zhang, X.Q.: Evolution of the GPGP/TÆMS Domain-Independent Coordination Framework. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 9(1–2), 87–143 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McCarthy, J.: Programs with common sense. In: Proceedings of the Teddington Conference on the Mechanisation of Thought Processes, pp. 77–84 (1958)Google Scholar
  14. Meneguzzi, F., Tang, Y., Sycara, K., Parsons, S.: An approach to generate MDPs using HTN representations. In: Decision Making in Partially Observable, Uncertain Worlds: Exploring Insights from Multiple Communities, Barcelona, Spain (2011)Google Scholar
  15. Morgenstern, L.: A first order theory of planning, knowledge, and action. In: Proceedings of the 1986 Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge, TARK 1986, pp. 99–114, San Francisco, CA, USA. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. (1986)Google Scholar
  16. Pereira, D.R., Gonçalves, L.V., Dimuro, G.P., Costa, A.C.R.: Constructing BDI plans from optimal POMDP policies, with an application to agentspeak programming. In: Proc. of Conf. Latinoamerica de Informática, CLEI, vol. 8, pp. 240–249 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: BDI agents: from theory to practice. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS 1995), pp. 312–319 (1995)Google Scholar
  18. Sabatucci, L., Cossentino, M., Lodato, C., Lopes, S., Seidita, V.: A possible approach for implementing self-awareness in JASON. In: EUMAS 2013, pp. 68–81 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. Schut, M.C., Wooldridge, M.J., Parsons, S.: On partially observable MDPs and BDI models. In: d’Inverno, M., Luck, M., Fisher, M., Preist, C. (eds.) UKMAS Workshops 1996-2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2403, p. 243. Springer, Heidelberg (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Simari, G.I., Parsons, S.: On the relationship between MDPs and the BDI architecture. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2006, pp. 1041–1048, New York, NY, USA. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  21. Thangarajah, J., Padgham, L., Winikoff, M.: Detecting and avoiding interference between goals in intelligent agents. In: IJCAI 2003, pp. 721–726 (2003)Google Scholar
  22. Thangarajah, J., Sardina, S., Padgham, L.: Measuring plan coverage and overlap for agent reasoning. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2012, vol. 2, pp. 1049–1056, Richland, SC. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2012)Google Scholar
  23. Toyama, K., Hager, G.: If at first you don’t succeed. In: Proc. AAAI, pp. 3–9, Providence, RI (1997)Google Scholar
  24. Waters, M., Padgham, L., Sardina, S.: Evaluating coverage based intention selection. In: Proceedings of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 957–964, Paris, France, May 2014. IFAAMAS. Nominated for Jodi Best Student Paper award (2014)Google Scholar
  25. Wilkins, D.E.: Representation in a domain-independent planner. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 733–740, Karlsruhe, FRG, August 1983 (1983)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Informatics, Centre for Intelligent Systems and their Applications, Artificial Intelligence Applications InstituteUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations