Predicting Exceptions in Agent-Based Supply-Chains

  • Albert Özkohen
  • Pınar Yolum
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3963)


Exceptions take place when one or more events take place unexpectedly. Exceptions occur frequently in supply-chains and mostly result in severe monetary losses. Consequently, detecting exceptions timely is of great practical value. Traditional approaches have aimed at detecting exceptions after they have occurred. Whereas this is important, predicting exceptions before they happen is of more importance, since it can ease the handling of exceptions.

Accordingly, this paper develops a commitment-based approach for modeling and predicting exceptions. The participants of the supply-chains are represented as autonomous agents. Their communication with other agents yields creation and manipulation of commitments. Violation of commitments leads to exceptions. We develop two methods for detecting such violations. The first method uses an AND/OR tree to analyze situations in small parts. The second method uses an ontology to generate new information about the environment and checks whether this information may cause any violations. When applied together, these methods can predict exceptions in supply-chain scenarios.


Supply Chain Leaf Node Multiagent System Autonomous Agent Shipping Company 
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.
    Swaminathan, J.M., Tayur, S.R.: Models for supply chains in e-business. Management Science 49, 1387–1406 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fox, M.S., Barbuceanu, M., Teigen, R.: Agent-oriented supply-chain management. International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 12, 165–188 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Singh, M.P., Huhns, M.N.: Service Oriented Computing—Semantics, Processes, Agents. Wiley, Chichester (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huhns, M.N., Stephens, L.M., Ivezic, N.: Automating supply-chain management. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 1017–1024. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Becker, T.J.: Putting a price on supply chain problems: Study links supply chain glitches with falling stock price. Georigia Tech Research News (2000), Available at:
  6. 6.
    Mallya, A.U., Singh, M.P.: Modeling exceptions via commitment protocols. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 122–129. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dellarocas, C., Klein, M.: A knowledge-based approach for designing robust business processes. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, pp. 60–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dellarocas, C., Klein, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A.: An exception handling architecture for open electronic marketplaces of contract net software agents. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 225–232 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Reasoning about commitments in the event calculus: An approach for specifying and executing protocols. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 42, 227–253 (2004)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 535–542. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singh, M.P.: An ontology for commitments in multiagent systems: Toward a unification of normative concepts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7, 97–113 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Castelfranchi, C.: Modelling social action for AI agents. Artificial Intelligence 103, 157–182 (1998)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nilsson, N.J.: Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    OWL: Web ontology language specification (2004), Available at:
  15. 15.
    SWRL: A semantic web rule language combining OWL and RuleML (2004), Available at:
  16. 16.
    Motik, B.: Kaon2 infrastructure library for managing owl-dl and swrl ontologies, Available at:
  17. 17.
    Kalakota, R., Stallaert, J., Whinston, A.B.: Implementing real-time supply chain optimization (1996), Available at:
  18. 18.
    Lesser, V., Decker, K., Wagner, T., Carver, N., Garvey, A., Horling, B., Neiman, D., Podorozhny, R., NagendraPrasad, M., Raja, A., Vincent, R., Xuan, P., Zhang, X.: Evolution of the GPGP/TAEMS Domain-Independent Coordination Framework. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 9, 87–143 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albert Özkohen
    • 1
  • Pınar Yolum
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer EngineeringBoğaziçi UniversityBebek, IstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations