Informed Deliberation During Norm-Governed Practical Reasoning

  • Martin J. Kollingbaum
  • Timothy J. Norman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3913)


A norm-governed agent takes social norms into account in its practical reasoning. Such norms characterise its role within a specific organisational context. By adopting a role, the agent commits to fulfil and adhere to the social norms associated with that role. These commitments require the agent to act in a way that does not violate any of its prohibitions or obligations. In adopting different sets of norms, an agent may experience conflicts between these norms as well as inconsistencies between possible actions for fulfilling its obligations and its currently adopted set of norms. In order to resolve such problems, it must be informed about conflicts and inconsistencies. The NoA architecture for norm-governed agents implements a computationally efficient mechanism for identifying and indicating such problems – possible candidates for action are assigned a specific label that contains cross-referenced information of actions and norms. As actions are indicated as problematic and not simply filtered out, the agent can still choose to either act according to its norms or against them. The labelling mechanism presented in this paper is therefore a critical step towards enabling an agent to reason about norm violations – the agent becomes norm-autonomous.


Practical Reasoning Autonomous Agent Plan Procedure Resolution Strategy Reactive Planning 
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.
    Bordini, R., Huebner, J.: Jason: A Java-based AgentSpeak Interpreter used with Saci for Multi-Agent Distribution over the Net, Manual (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Broersen, J., Dastani, M., Hulstijn, J., Huang, Z., van der Torre, L.: The BOID architecture: Conflicts between Beliefs, Obligations, Intentions and Desires. In: Proceedings of Autonomous Agents 2001, pp. 9–16 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castelfranchi, C.: Modelling Social Action for AI Agents. Artificial Intelligence 103, 157–182 (1998)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castelfranchi, C., Dignum, F., Jonker, C., Treur, J.: Deliberate normative Agents: Principles and Architecture. In: Jennings, N.R. (ed.) ATAL 1999. LNCS, vol. 1757, pp. 364–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Conte, R., Falcone, R., Sartor, G.: Agents and Norms: How to fill the Gap? Artificial Intelligence and Law 7(1) (March 1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dignum, F.: Autonomous Agents with Norms. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7, 69–79 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dignum, F., Kinny, D., Sonenberg, L.: From Desires, Obligations and Norms to Goals. Cognitive Science Quarterly 2(3–4), 407–430 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Firby, R.J.: An Investigation into Reactive Planning in Complex Domains. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intellgence (AAAI), pp. 809–815 (1987)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Forgy, C.L.: Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern / Many Object Pattern Match Problem. Artificial Intelligence 19, 17–37 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Georgeff, M.P., Lansky, A.: Reactive Reasoning and Planning. In: Proceedings AAAI 1987, Seattle, WA, pp. 677–682 (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jones, A.J.I., Sergot, M.: A Formal Characterisation of Institutionalised Power. Journal of the IGPL 4(3), 429–445 (1996)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kollingbaum, M.J.: Norm-governed Practical Reasoning Agents. PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kollingbaum, M.J., Norman, T.J.: Supervised Interaction - creating a Web of Trust for Contracting Agents in Electronic Environments. In: Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W. (eds.) First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems AAMAS 2002, pp. 272–279. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kollingbaum, M.J., Norman, T.J.: Strategies for Resolving Norm Conflict in Practical Reasoning. In: ECAI Workshop CEAS (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lopez y Lopez, F., Luck, M., dÍnverno, M.: Constraining autonomy through norms. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, pp. 647–681 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Norman, T.J., Reed, C.A.: Delegation and Responsibility. In: Castelfranchi, C., Lespérance, Y. (eds.) ATAL 2000. LNCS, vol. 1986, pp. 136–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pacheco, O., Carmo, J.: A Role Based Model for the Normative Specification of Organized Collective Agency and Agents Interaction. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 6(2), 145–184 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wooldridge, M.: Reasoning about Rational Agents. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin J. Kollingbaum
    • 1
  • Timothy J. Norman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computing ScienceUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations