A Performative Type Hierarchy and Other Interesting Considerations in the Design of the CASA Agent Architecture

  • Rob Kremer
  • Roberto Flores
  • Chad La Fournie
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2922)

Abstract

In this paper, we describe several interesting design decisions we have taken (with respect to inter- agent messaging) in the re-engineered CASA architecture for agent communication and services. CASA is a new architecture designed from the ground up; it is influenced by the major agent architectures such as FIPA, CORBA, and KQML but is intended to be independent (which doesn’t imply incompatible). The primary goals are flexibility, extendibility, simplicity, and ease of use. The lessons learned in the earlier implementation have fed the current design of the system. Among the most interesting of the design issues are the use of performatives that form a type lattice, which allows for observers, who do not necessarily understand all the performatives, to nonetheless understand a conversation at an appropriate semantic level. The new design considerations add a great deal of flexibility and integrity to an agent communications architecture.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Becerra, G.: A Security Pattern for Multi-Agent Systems. In: Far, B.H., Rochefort, S., Moussavi, M. (eds.) Proceedings of Agent Based Technologies and Systems, Calgary, Canada, August 2003, pp. 142–153 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chopra, A., Singh, M.P.: Nonmonotonic Commitment Machines. In: Dignum, F.P.M. (ed.) ACL 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2922, pp. 183–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Finin, T., Labrou, Y.: KQML as an Agent Communication Language. In: Bradshaw, J.M. (ed.) Software Agents, pp. 291–316. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Flores, R.A.: Modelling Agent Conversations for Action. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, Canada (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flores, R.A., Kremer, R.C.: To Commit or Not To Commit: Modelling Agent Conversations for Action. In: Chaib-draa, B., Dignum, F. (eds.) Computational Intelligence, Special Issue on Agent Communication Languages, May 2002, vol. 18(2), pp. 120–173. Blackwell Publishing, Malden (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Protocol Specification using a Commitment-based ACL. In: Dignum, F.P.M. (ed.) ACL 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2922, pp. 108–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA). FIPA Communicative Act Repository Specification. Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (October 18, 2002), http://www.fipa.org/specs/fipa00037/
  8. 8.
    Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA). FIPA Interaction Protocol Library Specification. Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (August 10, 2001), http://www.fipa.org/specs/fipa00025/XC00025E.html#_Toc505480198
  9. 9.
    Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA). FIPA Specifications, Version 1 (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley Professional Computing Series. Addison- Wesley, Reading (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mallya, A.U., Yolum, P., Singh, M.: Resolving Commitments Among Autonomous Agents. In: Dignum, F.P.M. (ed.) ACL 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2922, pp. 166–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saeed, J.I.: Semantics. Blackwell Publishers Ltd., Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thurgood, G.: English 222: Pedagogical Grammar. English Department, California State University, Chico, August 2002, ch. 9, http://www.csuchico.edu/~gt18/222/Ch%2009.pdf
  14. 14.
    Verdicchio, M., Colombetti, M.: A logical model of social commitment for agent communication. In: Dignum, F.P.M. (ed.) ACL 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2922, pp. 128–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Extensible Markup Language (XML). Architecture Domain, World Wide Web Consortium (October 14, 2002), http://www.w3.org/XML/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rob Kremer
    • 1
  • Roberto Flores
    • 2
  • Chad La Fournie
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.Institute of Cognitive Sciences and TechnologiesNational Research CouncilRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations