Adding Knowledge Updates to 3APL

  • Vivek Nigam
  • João Leite
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4411)

Abstract

3APL is a widely known multi-agent programming language. However, when to be used in certain domains and environments, 3APL has some limitations related to its simplistic update operator that only allows for updates to the extensional part of the belief base and its lack of a language with both default and strong negation to enable the representation and reasoning about knowledge with the open and closed world assumptions. In this paper, we propose to address these issues by modifying the belief base of 3APL to be represented by Dynamic Logic Programming, an extension of Answer-Set Programming that allows for the representation of knowledge that changes with time.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alferes, J.J., Banti, F., Brogi, A., Leite, J.A.: The refined extension principle for semantics of dynamic logic programming. Studia Logica 79(1), 7–32 (2005)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alferes, J.J., Leite, J., Pereira, L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.: Dynamic updates of non-monotonic knowledge bases. Journal of Logic Programming 45(1-3), 43–70 (2000)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baral, C.: Reasoning about actions: Non-deterministic effects, constraints, and qualification. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 95, vol. 2, Montréal, Québec, Canada, August 20-25 1995, pp. 2017–2026. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baral, C.: Knowledge Representation, Reasoning and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bordini, R., Hübner, J., Vieira, R.: Jason and the Golden Fleece of agent-oriented programming. In: Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., Seghrouchni, A.E.F. (eds.) Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Platforms and Applications. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations, vol. 15, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., Seghrouchni, A.E.F. (eds.): Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Platforms and Applications. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations, vol. 15. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bordini, R.H., Braubach, L., Dastani, M., Seghrouchni, A.E.F., Gomez-Sanz, J.J., Leite, J., O’Hare, G., Pokahr, A., Ricci, A.: A survey of programming languages and platforms for multi-agent systems. Informatica 30(1), 33–44 (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Constantini, S., Tocchio, A.: A logic programming language for multi-agent systems. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 1–13. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dastani, M., van Riemsdijk, M.B.: Programming multi-agent systems in 3APL. In: Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Platforms and Applications. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations, vol. 15, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dix, J., Zhang, Y.: IMPACT: a multi-agent framework with declarative semantics. In: Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., Seghrouchni, A.E.F. (eds.) Multi-Agent Programming: Languages, Platforms and Applications. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations, vol. 15, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Logic programs with classical negation. In: Warren and Szeredi (eds.) 7th International Conference on Logic Programming, pp. 579–597. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hindriks, K., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Agent programming in 3apl. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2(4), 357–401 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Katsuno, H., Mendelzon, A.O.: On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Allen, J.A., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’91), pp. 387–394. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leite, J.: Evolving Knowledge Bases. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leite, J.: On some differences between semantics of logic program updates. In: Lemaître, C., Reyes, C.A., González, J.A. (eds.) IBERAMIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3315, pp. 375–385. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leite, J., Pereira, J.J.A.L.M., Przymusinska, H., Przymusinski, T.: A language for multi-dimensional updates. In: Dix, J., Leite, J.A., Satoh, K. (eds.) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems: 3rd International Workshop, CLIMA’02, Copenhagen, Denmark, August 1, 2002, Pre-Proceedings. Datalogiske Skrifter, vol. 93, pp. 19–34. Roskilde University (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leite, J., Alferes, J.J., Pereira, L.M.: On the use of multi-dimensional dynamic logic programming to represent societal agents’ viewpoints. In: Brazdil, P.B., Jorge, A.M. (eds.) EPIA 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2258, pp. 276–289. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leite, J., Alferes, J.J., Pereira, L.M.: Minerva - a dynamic logic programming agent architecture. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) ATAL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2333, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leite, J., Pereira, L.M.: Generalizing updates: From models to programs. In: Dix, J., Moniz Pereira, L., Przymusinski, T.C. (eds.) LPKR 1997. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1471, pp. 224–246. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mascardi, V., Martelli, M., Sterling, L.: Logic-based specification languages for intelligent software agents. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(4) (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nigam, V., Leite, J.: Using dynamic logic programming to obtain agents with declarative goals. In: Baldoni, M., Endriss, U. (eds.) Pre-Procs. of the 4th International Workshop on Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies (DALT’06), Hakodate, Japan (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thielscher, M.: Reasoning Robots: The Art and Science of Programming Robotic Agents. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vivek Nigam
    • 1
  • João Leite
    • 1
  1. 1.CENTRIA, New University of LisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations