Enhancing UML to Formalize the FIPA Agent Interaction Protocol

  • Øystein Haugen
  • Ragnhild Kobro Runde
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 25)


The FIPA Contract Net Interaction Protocol cannot be described properly with UML 2.1 Sequence Diagrams. The ability to multicast messages is an important feature that is lacking. We show how minor enhancements of UML will make it more suited to express agent protocols. We also explain why the earlier enhancements proposed by the Agent UML are not quite satisfactory. We show how the protocol exceptions can be defined. Finally a formal semantics is given to the enhancements.


UML modeling Contract Net Interaction Protocol STAIRS multicast sequence diagram 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Foundation for Intelligent Pysical Agents: FIPA Contract Net Interaction Protocol Specification (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    OMG: Unified Modeling Language 2.1 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Odell, J., Parunak, H.V.D., Bauer, B.: Extending UML for agents. In: AOIS Workshop at AAAI 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huget, M.P.: Extending agent UML sequence diagrams. In: Giunchiglia, F., Odell, J.J., Weiss, G. (eds.) AOSE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2585, pp. 150–161. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bauer, B., Odell, J.: UML 2.0 and agents: how to build agent-based systems with the new UML standard. Journal of Engineering Applications of Artificaial Intelligence 18, 141–157 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haugen, Ø., Stølen, K.: STAIRS — Steps to analyze interactions with refinement semantics. In: Stevens, P., Whittle, J., Booch, G. (eds.) UML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2863, pp. 388–402. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K.: STAIRS towards formal design with sequence diagrams. Journal of Software and Systems Modeling 4, 349–458 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Runde, R.K., Haugen, Ø., Stølen, K.: The pragmatics of STAIRS. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2005. LNCS, vol. 4111, pp. 88–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haugen, Ø., Møller-Pedersen, B.: Configurations by UML. In: Gruhn, V., Oquendo, F. (eds.) EWSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4344, pp. 98–112. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Runde, R.K.: STAIRS — Understanding and Developing Specifications Expressed as UML Interaction Diagrams. Ph.D thesis, University of Oslo (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haugen, Ø., Husa, K.E., Runde, R.K., Stølen, K.: Why timed sequence diagrams require three-event semantics. In: Leue, S., Systä, T.J. (eds.) Scenarios: Models, Transformations and Tools. LNCS, vol. 3466, pp. 1–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fallah-Seghrouchni, A.E., Haddad, S., Mazouzi, H.: A formal study of interactions in multi-agent systems. I. J. Comput. Appl. 8 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ayed, L.J.B., Siala, F.: Specification and verification of multi-agent systems interaction protocols using a combination of AUML and event B. In: Graham, T.C.N., Palanque, P. (eds.) DSV-IS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5136, pp. 102–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Walton, C.: Agency and the Semantic Web. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Poslad, S.: Specifying protocols for multi-agent systems interaction. TAAS 2 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hélouët, L.: Distributed system requirement modeling with message sequence charts: the case of the RMTP2 protocol. Information & Software Technology 45, 701–714 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gherbi, A., Khendek, F.: Distributed real-time behavioral requirements modeling using extended UML/SPT. In: Gotzhein, R., Reed, R. (eds.) SAM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4320, pp. 34–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Whittle, J.: Precise specification of use case scenarios. In: Dwyer, M.B., Lopes, A. (eds.) FASE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4422, pp. 170–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dahle, H.P.: Model-driven development offers high level approach (2007), http://www.itea2.org/public/project_leaflets/MOSIS_profile_oct-07.pdf
  20. 20.
    Broy, M., Stølen, K.: Specification and Development of Interactive Systems: Focus on Streams, Interfaces, and Refinement. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Øystein Haugen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ragnhild Kobro Runde
    • 2
  1. 1.SINTEFOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations