Operational Modelling of Agent Autonomy: Theoretical Aspects and a Formal Language

  • Gerhard Weiß
  • Felix Fischer
  • Matthias Nickles
  • Michael Rovatsos
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3950)


Autonomy has always been conceived as one of the defining attributes of intelligent agents. While the past years have seen considerable progress regarding theoretical aspects of autonomy, and while autonomy has been identified as an enabler for new computing paradigms such as grid computing, (web-)service-oriented computing or ubiquitous computing, autonomy as a software property is still miles away from implementation. Because of the legal responsibility of designers or users for the actions of autonomous software, the implementation of autonomy will require rigorous modelling and verification, so as to ensure maximum dependability. We take a first step in this direction by introducing a formal language ASL (Autonomy Specification Language) that allows for a precise specification of the activities to be carried out by a set of agents, the deontic constraints imposed on these activities, and the implications of activity execution on particular constraints (i.e., constraint dynamics). Agent autonomy is implicit in an ASL specification as the degrees of freedom left to the agents for the execution of activities.


Status Statement Multiagent System Agent Autonomy Status Range Assembly Manager 
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.
    Damianou, N., Dulay, N., Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: The ponder policy specification language. In: Sloman, M., Lobo, J., Lupu, E.C. (eds.) POLICY 2001. LNCS, vol. 1995, Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dignum, F.: Autonomous agents with norms. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7, 69–79 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dignum, V.: A model for organizational interaction: based on agents, founded in logic. PhD thesis, Utrecht University, The Netherlands (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Esteva, M.: Eletronic institutions: from specification to development. PhD thesis, IIIA, Spain (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hexmoor, H., Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Agent autonomy. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations (MASA), vol. 7. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lopez y Lopez, F., Luck, M., d’Inverno, M.: Constraining autonomy through norms. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lupu, E., Sloman, M.: Towards a role based framework for distributed systems management. Journal of Network and Systems Management 5(1), 5–30 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Müller, H.-J., Dieng, R. (eds.): Computational conflicts. Conflict modeling for distributed intelligent systems. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Musliner, D., Pell, B.: Agents with adjustable autonomy. Papers from the AAAI spring symposium. Technical Report SS-99-06, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Weiss, G. (eds.): AUTONOMY 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2969. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pacheco, O., Carmo, J.: A role based model for the normative specification of organized collective agency and agents interaction. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (JAAMAS) 6(2), 125–184 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Salceda, J.: The role of norms and electronic institutions in multi-agent systems applied to complex domains. PhD thesis, Technical University of Catalonia, Spain (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tessier, C., Chaudron, L., Müller, H.-J. (eds.): Conflicting agents. Conflict management in multiagent systems. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations (MASA), vol. 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Verhagen, H.: Norm Autonomous Agents. PhD thesis, Department of System and Computer Sciences, The Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weiß, G., Rovatsos, M., Nickles, M., Meinl, C.: Capturing agent autonomy in roles and XML. In: Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 105–112 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerhard Weiß
    • 1
  • Felix Fischer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Matthias Nickles
    • 1
  • Michael Rovatsos
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsTechnical University of MunichGarchingGermany
  2. 2.Department of InformaticsUniversity of MunichMunichGermany
  3. 3.School of InformaticsThe University of EdinburghEdinburghUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations