Designing a Knowledge Representation Interface for Cognitive Agents

  • Timea BagosiEmail author
  • Joachim de Greeff
  • Koen V. Hindriks
  • Mark A. Neerincx
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9318)


The design of cognitive agents involves a knowledge representation (KR) to formally represent and manipulate information relevant for that agent. In practice, agent programming frameworks are dedicated to a specific KR, limiting the use of other possible ones. In this paper we address the issue of creating a flexible choice for agent programmers regarding the technology they want to use. We propose a generic interface, that provides an easy choice of KR for cognitive agents. Our proposal is governed by a number of design principles, an analysis of functional requirements that cognitive agents pose towards a KR, and the identification of various features provided by KR technologies that the interface should capture. We provide two use-cases of the interface by describing its implementation for Prolog and OWL with rules.


Knowledge representation technology Agent programming framework Generic interface design 


  1. 1.
    Anguswamy, R., Frakes, W.B.: Reuse design principles (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baader, F.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bechhofer, S., Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Tessaris, S.: A proposal for a description logic interface. In: Proceedings of Description Logics, pp. 33–36 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bordini, R.H., Hübner, J.F.: Jason-A Java-based interpreter for an extended version of AgentSpeak (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bordini, R.H., Hübner, J.F., Wooldridge, M.: Programming multi-agent systems in AgentSpeak using Jason, vol. 8. Wiley (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cingolani, P., Alcala-Fdez, J.: jfuzzylogic: a robust and flexible fuzzy-logic inference system language implementation. In: 2012 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), pp. 1–8, June 2012Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dastani, M.: 2APL: a practical agent programming language. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 16(3), 214–248 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dastani, M., Hindriks, K.V., Novák, P., Tinnemeier, N.A.M.: Combining multiple knowledge representation technologies into agent programming languages. In: Baldoni, M., Son, T.C., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Winikoff, M. (eds.) DALT 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5397, pp. 60–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davis, R., Shrobe, H., Szolovits, P.: What is a knowledge representation? AI Mag. 14(1), 17 (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dix, J., Hindriks, K.V., Logan, B., Wobcke, W.: Engineering multi-agent systems (dagstuhl seminar 12342) (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dix, J., Zhang, Y.: IMPACT: A multi-agent framework with declarative semantics. In: Multi-Agent Programming, pp. 69–94 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freitas, A., Schmidt, D., Panisson, A., Meneguzzi, F., Vieira, R., Bordini, R.H.: Integrating multi-agent systems in JaCaMo using a semantic representations. In: Workshop on Collaborative Agents, CARE for Intelligent Mobile Services (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heintz, F.: Dyknow: A stream-based knowledge processing middleware framework (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hindriks, K.V.: The GOAL Agent Programming Language hub.
  15. 15.
    Hindriks, K.V.: Programming rational agents in GOAL. In: El Fallah Seghrouchni, A., Dix, J., Dastani, M., Bordini, R.H. (eds.) Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Tools and Applications, pp. 119–157. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hirsch, B., Konnerth, T., Heßler, A.: Merging agents and services the JIAC agent platform. In: Multi-Agent Programming: pp. 159–185. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Horridge, M., Bechhofer, S.: The OWL Api: A Java Api for OWL ontologies. Semant. Web 2(1), 11–21 (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., Dean, M., et al.: SWRL: A semantic web rule language combining OWL and RuleML. W3C Member Submission 21, 79 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klapiscak, T., Bordini, R.H.: JASDL: a practical programming approach combining agent and semantic web technologies. In: Baldoni, M., Son, T.C., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Winikoff, M. (eds.) DALT 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5397, pp. 91–110. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Krueger, C.W.: Software reuse. ACM Comput. Surv. 24(2), 131–183 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McGuinness, D.L., Van Harmelen, F., et al.: OWL web ontology language overview. W3C Recommendation 10(10), 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moreira, A.F., Vieira, R., Bordini, R.H., Hübner, J.F.: Agent-oriented programming with underlying ontological reasoning. In: Baldoni, M., Endriss, U., Omicini, A., Torroni, P. (eds.) DALT 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3904, pp. 155–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Motik, B., Sattler, U., Studer, R.: Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. Web Semant.: Sci., Serv. Agents World Wide Web 3(1), 41–60 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    O’Connor, M.J., Das, A.K.: SQWRL: a query language for OWL. In: OWLED, vol. 529 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    O’Connor, M.J., Shankar, R.D., Musen, M.A., Das, A.K., Nyulas, C.: The SWRLAPI: a development environment for working with SWRL rules. In: OWLED (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pan, J.Z.: Resource description framework. In: Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 71–90. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pérez, J., Arenas, M., Gutierrez, C.: Semantics and Complexity of SPARQL. ACM Trans. Database Syst 34(3), 16:1–16:45 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pokahr, A., Braubach, L., Lamersdorf, W.: Jadex: A BDI reasoning engine. In: Multi-agent programming, pp. 149–174. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Russell, S., Jordan, H., O’Hare, G.M.P., Collier, R.W.: Agent factory: a framework for prototyping logic-based AOP languages. In: Klügl, F., Ossowski, S. (eds.) MATES 2011. LNCS, vol. 6973, pp. 125–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Silva, D.G., Gluz, J.C.: AgentSpeak (PL): A new programming language for BDI agents with integrated bayesian network model. In: 2011 International Conference on Information Science and Applications (ICISA), pp. 1–7. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Web Semant.: Sci., Serv. Agents World Wide Web 5(2), 51–53 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang, J., Ju, S.E., Liu, C.N.: Agent-oriented probabilistic logic programming. J. Comput. Sci. Technol. 21(3), 412–417 (2006)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Winikoff, M.: JACK intelligent agents: An industrial strength platform. In: Multi-Agent Programming, pp. 175–193. Springer (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timea Bagosi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Joachim de Greeff
    • 1
  • Koen V. Hindriks
    • 1
  • Mark A. Neerincx
    • 1
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftNetherlands

Personalised recommendations