Action and Agency in Norm-Governed Multi-agent Systems
There is growing interest in the idea that, in some cases, interactions among multiple, independently acting agents in a multi-agent system can be regulated and managed by norms (or ‘social laws’) which, if respected, allow the agents to co-exist in a shared environment. We present a formal (modal-logical) language for describing and analysing such systems. We distinguish between system norms, which express a system designer’s view of what system behaviours are deemed to be legal, permitted, desirable, and so on, and agent-specific norms which constrain and guide an individual agent’s behaviours and which are supposed to be incorporated, in one way or another, in the agent’s implementation. The language provides constructs for expressing properties of states and transitions in a transition system, and modalities of the kind found in logics of action/agency for expressing that an agent brings it about that, or is responsible for, its being the case that A. The novel feature is that an agent, or group of agents, brings it about that a transition has a certain property rather than bringing it about that a certain state of affairs obtains, as is usually the case. The aim of the paper is to motivate the technical development and illustrate the use of the formal language by means of a simple example in which there there are both physical and normative constraints on agents’ behaviours. We discuss some relationships between system norms and agent-specific norms, and identify several different categories of non-compliant behaviour that can be expressed and analysed using the formal language. The final part of the paper presents some transcripts of output from a model-checker for the language.
KeywordsTransition System Individual Norm Multiagent System Male Agent Label Transition System
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Pörn, I.: Action Theory and Social Science: Some Formal Models. In: Synthese Library, Number 120. D. Reidel, Dordrecht (1977)Google Scholar
- 3.Sergot, M.: The logic of unwitting collective agency. Technical Report 2008/6, Department of Computing, Imperial College London (2008)Google Scholar
- 5.Sergot, M.: (C+)++: An action language for modelling norms and institutions. Technical Report 2004/8, Department of Computing, Imperial College London (2004)Google Scholar
- 10.von Wright, G.H.: Norm and Action—A Logical Enquiry. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London (1963)Google Scholar
- 17.Ågotnes, T., van der Hoek, W., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A., Sierra, C., Wooldridge, M.: On the logic of normative systems. In: Veloso, M.M. (ed.) Proceedings of the Twentieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2007), pp. 1175–1180. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2007)Google Scholar
- 23.Hilpinen, R.: On action and agency. In: Ejerhed, E., Lindström, S. (eds.) Logic, Action and Cognition—Essays in Philosophical Logic. Trends in Logic, Studia Logica Library, vol. 2, pp. 3–27. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1997)Google Scholar
- 24.Chellas, B.F.: The Logical Form of Imperatives. Dissertation, Stanford University (1969)Google Scholar
- 25.von Wright, G.H.: An essay in deontic logic and the general theory of action. Number 21 in Acta Philosophica Fennica (1968)Google Scholar
- 26.von Wright, G.H.: Practical Reason. Blackwell, Oxford (1983)Google Scholar