Towards a Natural Agent Paradigm Development Methodology

  • Fernando Alonso
  • Sonia Frutos
  • Loïc Martínez
  • César Montes
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3187)


It is indisputable that software development using agents and, more specifically, the multi-agent systems concept has greater potential for dealing with complex problems than other more traditional approaches. The agent paradigm is acquiring the status of an engineering discipline and gradually leaving the laboratory and moving into industry. However, it has two major omissions: it is missing an agent modeling language and a consolidated development process such as the object paradigm now has. Although we do not provide a definitive answer to this question in this paper, we do try to help to solve the problem as it relates to the agent-oriented development process by considering what features an agent-based development methodology should have, pointing out the omissions of current methodologies and presenting the SONIA methodology that includes the required features.


Multiagent System Agent Society Knowledge Component Agent Architecture Agent Paradigm 
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.
    Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N.R., Omicini, A., Wooldridge, M.: Agent-Oriented Software Engineering for Internet Applications. In: Omicini, A., Zambonelli, F., Klusch, M., Tolksdorf, R. (eds.) Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies and Applications, pp. 326–346. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huhns, M., Singh, M.P. (eds.): Readings in Agents. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wooldridge, M.: An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Epstein, J.M., Axtell, R.L.: Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. The Brooking Institution Press & The MIT Press (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lind, J.: Issues in Agent-Oriented Software Engineering. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1957, pp. 45–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fisher, M., Müller, J., Schroeder, M., Staniford, G., Wagne, G.: Methodological Foundations for Agent-Based Systems. Knowledge Engineering Review 12(3), 323–329 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Weiss, G.: Agent Orientation in Software Engineering. Knowledge Engineering Review 16(4), 349–373 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wooldridge, M., Ciancarini, P.: Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: The State of the Art. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1957, pp. 1–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tveit, A.: A Survey of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering. First NTNU CSGSC (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iglesias, C.A., Garijo, M., González, J.C.: A Survey of Agent-Oriented Methodologies. In: Rao, A.S., Singh, M.P., Müller, J.P. (eds.) ATAL 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1555, pp. 317–330. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Durfee, E.H., Lesser, V.R.: Negotiating Task Decomposition and Allocation Using Partial Global Planning. In: Huhns, M., Gasser, L. (eds.) Distributed Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2, Pitman Publishing Ltd., London (1989)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bond, A.H., Gasser, L.: An Analysis of Problems and Research in DAI. In: Bond, A.H., Gasser, L. (eds.) Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pp. 3–36. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo (1988)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.: Applications of Intelligent Agents. In: Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M. (eds.) Agent Technology: Foundations, Applications and Markets, pp. 3–28. Springer, Berlin (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Software Engineering with Agents: Pitfalls and Pratfalls. IEEE Internet Computing 3(3), 20–27 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frutos, S.: Modelo de Diseño de una Arquitectura Multi-Agente Basado en un Modelo de Sociedad de Agentes. PhD Thesis. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I.: The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison-Wesley Longman, Amsterdam (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Odell, J., Parunak, H.V.D., Bauer, B.: Extending UML for Agents. In: Wagner, G., Lesperance, Y., Yu, E. (eds.) Proc. of the Agent-Oriented Information Systems Workshop at the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ICue Publishing (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lesser, V.R., Corkill, D.D.: Distributed Problem Solving. In: Shapiro, S.C. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence., pp. 245–251. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1987)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wavish, P., Graham, M.: A situated action approach to implementing characters in computer games. Int. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence 10(1), 53–73 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bresciani, P., Giorgini, P., Giunchiglia, F., Mylopoulos, J.: Tropos: An Agent Oriented Software Development Methodology. Int. Journal of Autonomous Agent and MultiAgent System 8(3), 203–236 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.: Developing Multiagent Systems: The Gaia Methodology. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 12(3), 317–370 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Padgham, L., Winikoff, M.: Prometheus: A Methodology for Developing Intelligent Agents. In: Giunchiglia, F., Odell, J.J., Weiss, G. (eds.) AOSE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2585, pp. 174–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Omicini, A.: SODA: Societies and Infrastructures in the Analysis and Design of Agent-Based Systems. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS ( LNAI ), vol. 1957, pp. 185–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bush, G., Cranefield, S., Purvis, M.: The Styx Agent Methodology. Information Science Discussion Paper Series, Number 2001/2002. University of Otago., New Zealand (2001)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Elammari, M., Lalonde, W.: An Agent-Oriented Methodology: High-Level and Intermediate Models. In: Proc. of the First Bi-Conference., Workshop on Agent-Oriented Information Systems (AOIS 1999), Heidelberg, Germany (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Collinot, A., Carle, P., Zeghal, K.: Cassiopeia: A Method for Designing Computational Organizations. In: Proc. of the First Int. Workshop on Decentralized Intelligent Multi-Agent Systems, Krakow, Poland, pp. 124–131 (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J.: The Unified Software Development Process. Addison Wesley Longman, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gervais, M.: ODAC: An Agent-Oriented Methodology Based on ODP. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 7(3), 199–228 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wood, M.F., DeLoach, S.A.: An Overview of the Multiagent Systems Engineering Methodology. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNAI), vol. 1957, pp. 207–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lind, J.: Iterative Software Engineering for Multiagent Systems. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1994. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brazier, F.M.T., Dunin-Keplicz, B., Jennings, N., Treur, J.: Desire: Modeling Multi-Agent Systems in a Compositional Formal Framework. Int. Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 6 (1997); Special Issue on Formal Methods in Cooperative Information Systems: Multiagent SystemsGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kinny, D., Georgeff, M., Rao, A.: A Methodology and Modeling Technique for Systems of BDI Agents. In: Perram, J., Van de Velde, W. (eds.) MAAMAW 1996. LNCS, vol. 1038, pp. 56–71. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kendall, E.A., Malkoun, M.T., Jiang, C.H.: A Methodology for Developing Agent Based Systems. In: Zhang, C., Lukose, D. (eds.) DAI 1995. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1087, pp. 85–99. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Burmeister, B.: Models and Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analysis and Design. In: Fischer, K. (ed.) Working Notes of the KI 1996 Workshop on Agent-Oriented Programming and Distributed Systems, Saarbrücken, Germany (1996)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Moulin, B., Cloutier, L.: Collaborative Work Based on Multi-Agent Architectures: A Methodological Perspective. In: Aminzadeh, F., Jamshidi, M. (eds.) Soft Computing: Fuzzy Logic, Neural Networks and Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pp. 261–296. Prentice-Hall, N.J (1994)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schreiber, G., Akkermans, H., Anjewierden, A., de Hoog, R., Shadbolt, N., Van de Velde, W., Wielinga, B.: Knowledge Engineering and Management. In: The CommonKADS Methodology, The MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Iglesias, C.A., Garijo, M., González, J.C., Velasco, J.R.: Analysis and Design of Multiagent Systems using MAS-CommonKADS. In: Rao, A., Singh, M.P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) ATAL 1997. LNCS, vol. 1365, pp. 313–326. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Glaser, N.: The CoMoMAS Methodology and Environment for Multi-Agent System Development. In: Zhang, C., Lukose, D. (eds.) DAI 1996. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1286, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Martínez, L.A.: Método para el Analysis Independiente de Problemas. PhD Thesis. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Spain (2003) Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Alonso, F., Barreiro, J.M., Frutos, S., Montes, C.: Multi-Agent Framework for Intelligent Questionnaire on the Web. In: Proc. of the Third World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (SCI 1999) and the Fifth Int. Conference on Information Systems Analysis and Synthesis (ISAS 1999), Orlando, USA, vol. III, pp. 8–15 (1999)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Alonso, F., Frutos, S., Fuertes, J.L., Martínez, L.A.: ALBOR. An Internet- Based Advisory KBS with a Multi-Agent Architecture. In: Int. Conference on Advances in Infrastructure for Electronic Business, Science, And Education on the Internet (SSGRR 2001), L’Aquila, Italy, pp. 1–6 (2001)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kelly, G.A.: The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Norton, New York (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fernando Alonso
    • 1
  • Sonia Frutos
    • 1
  • Loïc Martínez
    • 1
  • César Montes
    • 1
  1. 1.Facultad de InformáticaUniversidad Politécnica de MadridBoadilla del Monte (Madrid)Spain

Personalised recommendations