Skip to main content

Obligations and Cooperation: Two Sides of Social Rationality

  • Chapter
Agent Autonomy

Abstract

Even if, at first sight, deciding whether to respect obligations and coordinating cooperation seems two unrelated behaviors, they are both grounded in the social rationality of agents: in fact, they depend on the ability of predicting the actions of other agents. In this paper, we present a proposal for managing anticipatory coordination, which is used to regulate the autonomy of and to control agents in a definition of cooperation among agents and in a framework for dealing with obligations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  • R. Axelrod. An evolutionary approach to norms. The American Political Science Review, 80(4): 1095–1111,1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • G. Boella. Cooperation among economically rational agents. PhD thesis, Università di Torino, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Boella, R. Damiano, and L. Lesmo. Cooperation and group utility. In N. Jennings and Y. Lespérance, editors, Intelligent Agents VIProceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL-99, Orlando FL), pages 319–333. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000a.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Boella, R. Damiano, and L. Lesmo. Social goals in conversational cooperation. In Proc. of Sigdial Workshop, Honk Kong, 2000b.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Boella and L. Lesmo. Deliberate normative agents. In Social order in MAS. Kluwer, 2001a.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Boella, L. Favali and L. Lesmo. The definition of legal relations in a bdi multiagent framework. In Proc. of AI*A. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2001b.

    Google Scholar 

  • M. E. Bratman. Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Carberry. Plan Recognition in Natural Language Dialogue. MIT Press, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • C. Castelfranchi. Modeling social action for AI agents. Artificial Intelligence, 103:157–182, 1998.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • P. Cohen and H. Levesque. Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence, 42:213–261, 1990.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • P. Cohen and H. Levesque. Confirmation and Joint Action, In Proc. 12th IJCA1, Sydney, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Dignum. Autonomous agents and social norms. In ICMAS’96 Workshop on Norms, Obligations and Conventions, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Giddens. Sociology. Polity Press, Cambridge, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. J. Gmytrasiewicz and E. H. Durfee. Formalization of recursive modeling. In Proc. of first ICMAS-95, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. Goffman. Strategic Interaction. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Grosz and S. Kraus. Collaborative plans for complex group action. Artificial Intelligence, 86(2):269–357, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • V. Ha and P. Haddawy. Theoretical foundations for abstraction-based probabilistic planning. In Proc. of 12th Conference on Uncertainty and Artificial Intelligence. Portland, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Haddawy and S. Hanks. Utility models for goal-directed, decision-theoretic planners. Computational Intelligence, 14:392–429, 1998.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • P. Haddawy and M. Suwandi. Decision-theoretic refinement planning using inheritance abstraction. In Proc. of 2nd Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems, pages 266–271, Menlo Park, CA, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • James Helwig and Peter Haddaw. An Abstraction-Based Approach to Interleaving Planning and Execution in Partially-Observable Domains, Plan Execution: Problems and Issues: Papers from the 1996 AAA1 Fall Symposium, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, California 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • I.Hideki and K.Hirofumi. Observability-based nested belief computation for multiagent systems and its formalization. In N. Jennings and Y. Lespérance, editors, Intelligent Agents VIProceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL-99), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • R. L. Keeney and H. Raiffa. Decision with multiple Objectives: preferences and value tradeoff. Cambrige University Press, Cambridge (UK), 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Ndiaye and A. Jameson. Predictive role taking in dialog: global anticipation feedback based on transmutability. In Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on User Modeling, pages 137–144, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • M.C. Schut and M. Wooldridge. Intention reconsideration in complex environments. In Proc. of Agents 2000, Barcelona, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Von Neumann and O. Morgenstern. The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1947.

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Zilberstein and S.. Russell. Anytime sensing, planning and action: A practical model for robot control. In Proc.of the Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1402–1407, Chambery, France, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Boella, G. (2003). Obligations and Cooperation: Two Sides of Social Rationality. In: Hexmoor, H., Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R. (eds) Agent Autonomy. Multiagent Systems, Artificial Societies, and Simulated Organizations, vol 7. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9198-0_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9198-0_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-4833-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-9198-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics