Skip to main content

Ethics-Based Cooperation in Multi-agent Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Social Simulation

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Complexity ((SPCOM))

Abstract

In the recent literature in Artificial Intelligence, ethical issues are increasingly discussed. Many proposals of ethical agents are made. However, those approaches consider mainly an agent-centered perspective, letting aside the collective dimension of multi-agent systems. For instance, when considering cooperation among such agents, ethics could be a key issue to drive the interactions among the agents. This paper presents a model for ethics-based cooperation. Each agent uses an ethical judgment process to compute images of the other agents’ ethical behavior. Based on a rationalist and explicit approach, the judgment process distinguishes a theory of good, namely, how values and moral rules are defined, and a theory of right, namely, how a behavior is judged with respect to ethical principles. From these images of the other agents’ ethics, the judging agent computes trust used to cooperate with the judged agents. We illustrate these functionalities in an asset management scenario with a proof of concept implemented in the JaCaMo multi-agent platform.

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 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    A behavior can deal with concurrency: several actions can have been done at the same time.

  2. 2.

    Let’s notice that in the definition of these images, the second parameter refers to an agent. It means that the image is built with respect to the knowledge of this agent. The first parameter refers to the considered agent’s behavior.

  3. 3.

    As for morals, conformity valuations are for instance { improper, neutral, congruent }.

  4. 4.

    http://www.nicolascointe.eu/projects/ethical_market_simulator

  5. 5.

    http://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/

  6. 6.

    http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/

References

  1. Abdul-Rahman, A., Hailes, S.: Supporting trust in virtual communities. In: 33th IEEE International Conference on Systems Sciences, pp. 1–9 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aldridge, I.: High-frequency trading: a practical guide to algorithmic strategies and trading systems, vol. 459. Wiley, Somerset (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alexander, L., Moore, M.: Deontological ethics. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Spring 2015 edition, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson, M., Anderson, S.L.: Toward ensuring ethical behavior from autonomous systems: a case-supported principle-based paradigm. Ind. Robot. 42(4), 324–331 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arkin, R.C.: Governing lethal behavior: Embedding ethics in a hybrid deliberative/reactive robot architecture. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction, 121–128 (2008, March)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Arkoudas, K., Bringsjord, S., Bello, P.: Toward ethical robots via mechanized deontic logic. In: AAAI Fall Symposium on Machine Ethics, pp. 17–23 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Berreby, F., Bourgne, G., Ganascia, J.-G.: Modelling moral reasoning and ethical responsibility with logic programming. In: LPAR Proceedings, pp. 532–548 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Boissier, O., Bordini, R.H., Hübner, J.F., Ricci, A., Santi, A.: Multi-agent oriented programming with JaCaMo. Sci. Comput. Program. 78(6), 747–761 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bono, S., Bresin, G., Pezzolato, F., Ramelli, S., Benseddik, F.: Green, social and ethical funds in Europe. Technical report, Vigeo (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carbo, J., Molina, J., Davila, J.: Comparing predictions of SPORAS vs. a fuzzy reputation agent system. In: Conference on Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Systems, pp. 147–153 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carter, J., Bitting, E., Ghorbani, A.: Reputation formalization for an information-sharing multi-agent system. Comput. Intell. 18(2), 515–534 (2002)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model, vol. 18. Wiley, Hoboken (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Coelho, H., da Rocha Costa, A.C.: On the intelligence of moral agency. Encontro Português de Inteligência Artificial, pp. 12–15 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Coelho, H., Trigo, P., da Rocha Costa, A.C.: On the operationality of moral-sense decision making. In: 2nd Brazilian Workshop on Social Simulation, pp. 15–20 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cointe, N., Bonnet, G., Boissier, O.: Ethical judgment of agents’ behaviors in multi-agent systems. In: AAMAS Proceedings, pp. 1106–1114 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cointe, N., Bonnet, G., Boissier, O.: Multi-agent based ethical asset management. In: 1st Workshop on Ethics in the Design of Intelligent Agents, pp. 52–57 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Conte, R., Paolucci, M.: Reputation in Artificial Societies: Social Beliefs for Social Order, vol. 6. Springer Science & Business Media, Boston (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Esfandiari, B., Chandrasekharan, S.: On how agents make friends: mechanisms for trust acquisition. In: Deception, Fraud, and Trust in Agent Societies Workshop, pp. 27–34 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs: Impact of the current economic and financial crisis on potential output. Occasional Papers 49, European Commission, June 2009

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ganascia, J.-G.: Ethical system formalization using non-monotonic logics. In: 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 1013–1018 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ganascia, J.-G.: Modelling ethical rules of lying with Answer Set Programming. Ethics Inf. Technol. 9(1), 39–47 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Horsburgh, H.J.N.: The ethics of trust. Philos. Q. 10(41), 343–354 (1960)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Johnson, R.: Kant’s moral philosophy. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Summer edition, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Josang, A., Ismail, R., Boyd, C.: A survey of trust and reputation systems for online service proposition. Decis. Support. Syst. 43(2), 618–644 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lorini, E.: On the logical foundations of moral agency. In: 11th International Conference on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, pp. 108–122 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Marsh, S.: Formalising trust as a computational concept. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Stirling, Stirling (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  27. McIntyre, A.: Doctrine of double effect. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter edition, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Muller, G., Vercouter, L., Boissier, O.: Towards a general definition of trust and its application to openness in MAS. In: 6th Workshop on Deception, Fraud and Trust in Agent Societies, pp. 49–56 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ricoeur, P.: Oneself as Another. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Rocha-Costa, A.: Moral systems of agent societies: some elements for their analysis and design. In: 1st Workshop on Ethics in the Design of Intelligent Agents, pp. 32–37 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sabater, J., Sierra, C.: Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artif. Intell. 24(1), 33–60 (2005)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Sabater-Mir, J., Vercouter, L.: Trust and reputation in multiagent Systems. Multiagent Systems, second Edition. Edited by Gerhard Weiss, MIT press. 381 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Saptawijaya, A., Moniz Pereira, L.: Towards modeling morality computationally with logic programming. In: Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages, pp. 104–119 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Timmons, M.: Moral Theory: An Introduction. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham (2012)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Vercouter, L., Muller, G.: L.I.A.R.: achieving social control in open and decentralized multiagent systems. Appl. Artif. Intell. 24(8), 723–768 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yu, B., Singh, M.P.: Distributed reputation management for electronic commerce. Comput. Intel. 18(4), 535–549 (2002)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Nicolas Cointe , Grégory Bonnet or Olivier Boissier .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Cointe, N., Bonnet, G., Boissier, O. (2020). Ethics-Based Cooperation in Multi-agent Systems. In: Verhagen, H., Borit, M., Bravo, G., Wijermans, N. (eds) Advances in Social Simulation. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34127-5_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics