AF-APL – Bridging Principles and Practice in Agent Oriented Languages

  • Robert Ross
  • Rem Collier
  • G. M. P. O’Hare
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3346)

Abstract

For AOP (Agent Oriented Programming) to become a mature discipline, lessons must be learned from practical language implementations. We present AF-APL (AgentFactory – Agent Programming Language) as an Agent Oriented Programming Language that has matured with continued revisions and implementations, resulting in a language – which, although based on the more theoretical aspects of AO design – has incorporated many of the practical considerations of programming real world agents. We describe AF-APL informally, focusing on its experience driven features, such as commitment reasoning, a rich plan operator set, and an inherent asynchronous design. We present the default execution cycle for the AF-APL interpreter, looking in detail at the Commitment Management model. This model provides an agent with power to reason about its own actions, while maintaining basic constraints on computational tractability. In our development of the language, we learned many lessons that are not covered in the purer AO language definitions. Before concluding, we discuss a number of these lessons.

Keywords

Multiagent System Commitment Management Reactive Rule Execution Cycle Perceptor Code 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Shoham, Y.: Agent oriented programming. Artificial Intelligence 60, 51–92 (1993)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dastani, M., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.: 3APL: A Programming Language for Cognitive Agents. ERCIM News, European Research (2000); Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics, Special issue on Cognitive Systems 53Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rao, A.: AgentSpeak(L): BDI Agents speak out in a logical computable language. In: Proceeedings of the Seventh European Workshop on Modelling autonomous agents in a MultiAgent world, Institute for Perception Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Collier, R.W.: Agent Factory: A Framework for the Engineering of Agent Oriented Applications. PhD thesis, University College Dublin (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bratman, M.: Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen, P., Levesque, H.: Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42, 213–261 (1990)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Georgeff, M., Lansky, A.: Reactive reasoning & planning. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Intenational Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1987), Seatle, WA, USA, pp. 677–682 (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ross, R.J., O’Donoghue, R., O’Hare, G.: Improving speech recognition accuracy on a mobile robot platform using top-down visual cues. In: Proc. 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Phelan, D., Strahan, R., Collier, R., Muldoon, C., O’Hare, G.: Sos: Accomodation on the fly with access. In: Proceedings of the 13th International FLorida Artificial Intelligence Research Symposium Conference (FLAIRS 2004), Miami Beech, Florida (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dennett, D.C.: The Intentional Stance. The MIT Press, Massachusetts (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: BDI agents: from theory to practice. In: Lesser, V. (ed.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS 1995), San Francisco, CA, USA, pp. 312–319. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hindrikis, K.V., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.J.: Agent Programming in 3APL. In: Proceedings of Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 1998 (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dastani, M., van Riemsdijk, B., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.: A Programming Language for Cognitive Agents: Goal Directed 3APL. In: Proceedings of AAMAS 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dickinson, I., Wooldridge, M.: Towards practical reasoning agents for the semantic web. In: 2nd Int. Joint Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2003), Melbourne, Australia (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pokahr, A., Braubach, L., Lamersdorf, W.: Jadex: Implementing a bdi-infrastructure for jade agents. EXP - In Search of Innovation  3, 76–85 (2003) (Special Issue on JADE)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ross, R., Collier, R., O’Hare, G.: Demonstrating social error recovery with agentfactory. In: Proceeedings of The Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Collier, R.W., O’Hare, G., Lowen, T., Rooney, C.: Beyond prototyping in the factory of agents. In: Mařík, V., Müller, J.P., Pěchouček, M. (eds.) CEEMAS 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2691, p. 383. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Ross
    • 1
  • Rem Collier
    • 2
  • G. M. P. O’Hare
    • 2
  1. 1.FB3, Mathematik-InformatikUniversität BremenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College DublinIreland

Personalised recommendations