Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Workshop on Engineering Multi-Agent Systems

EMAS 2020: Engineering Multi-Agent Systems pp 61–77Cite as

Fragility and Robustness in Multiagent Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 12589))

Abstract

Robustness is an important property of software systems, and the availability of proper feedback is seen as crucial to obtain it, especially in the case of systems of distributed and interconnected components. Multiagent Systems (MAS) are valuable for conceptualizing and implementing distributed systems, but the current design methodologies for MAS fall short in addressing robustness in a systematic way at design time. In this paper we outline our vision of how robustness in MAS can be granted as a design property. To this end, we exploit the notion of accountability as a mechanism to build reporting frameworks and, then, we describe how robustness is gained. We exemplify our vision on the JaCaMo agent platform.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. ISO/IEC/IEEE International Standard - Systems and software engineering - Vocabulary. ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2010(E), pp. 1–418, December 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2010.5733835

  2. Alderson, D.L., Doyle, J.C.: Contrasting views of complexity and their implications for network-centric infrastructures. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 40(4), 839–852 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aldewereld, H., Dignum, V., Vasconcelos, W.W.: Group norms for multi-agent organisations. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. 11(2), 15:1–15:31 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baarslag, T., Kaisers, M., Gerding, E.H., Jonker, C.M., Gratch, J.: When will negotiation agents be able to represent us? The challenges and opportunities for autonomous negotiators. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2017, Melbourne, Australia, 19–25 August 2017, pp. 4684–4690 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Boissier, O., May, K.M., Micalizio, R., Tedeschi, S.: Accountability and responsibility in agent organizations. In: Miller, T., Oren, N., Sakurai, Y., Noda, I., Savarimuthu, B.T.R., Cao Son, T. (eds.) PRIMA 2018. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11224, pp. 261–278. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03098-8_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Boissier, O., Micalizio, R., Tedeschi, S.: Accountability and responsibility in multiagent organizations for engineering business processes. In: Dennis, L.A., Bordini, R.H., Lespérance, Y. (eds.) EMAS 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12058, pp. 3–24. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51417-4_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Capuzzimati, F.: A commitment-based infrastructure for programming socio-technical systems. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 14(4), 23:1–23:23 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2677206. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2677206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Capuzzimati, F., Micalizio, R.: Commitment-based agent interaction in JaCaMo+. Fundamenta Informaticae 159(1–2), 1–33 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Capuzzimati, F., Micalizio, R.: Type checking for protocol role enactments via commitments. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 32(3), 349–386 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-018-9382-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., May, K.M., Micalizio, R., Tedeschi, S.: Computational accountability. In: Chesani, F., Mello, P., Milano, M. (eds.) Deep Understanding and Reasoning: A Challenge for Next-Generation Intelligent Agents, URANIA 2016, Genoa, Italy, vol. 1802, pp. 56–62. CEUR, Workshop Proceedings, December 2016. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1802/

  11. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., May, K.M., Micalizio, R., Tedeschi, S.: Computational accountability in MAS organizations with ADOPT. Appl. Sci. 8(4), 489 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., May, K.M., Micalizio, R., Tedeschi, S.: MOCA: an ORM model for computational accountability. J. Intell. Artif. 13(1), 5–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3233/IA-180014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 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). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016764231100181X

  14. Bovens, M.: Two concepts of accountability: accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West Eur. Polit. 33(5), 946–967 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: The thing itself speaks: accountability as a foundation for requirements in sociotechnical systems. In: IEEE 7th International Workshop RELAW. IEEE Computer Society (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/RELAW.2014.6893477

  16. Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: From social machines to social protocols: software engineering foundations for sociotechnical systems. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on WWW (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: Sociotechnical systems and ethics in the large. In: Furman, J., Marchant, G.E., Price, H., Rossi, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, AIES 2018, New Orleans, LA, USA, 02–03 February 2018, pp. 48–53. ACM (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: Clouseau: generating communication protocols from commitments. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2020), pp. 7244–7252. AAAI Press (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cranefield, S., Oren, N., Vasconcelos, W.W.: Accountability for practical reasoning agents. In: Lujak, M. (ed.) AT 2018. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11327, pp. 33–48. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17294-7_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Dubnick, M.J.: Blameworthiness, trustworthiness, and the second-personal standpoint: foundations for an ethical theory of accountability. Presented at EGPA Annual Conference, Group VII: Quality and Integrity of Governance, Edinburgh, Scotland, 11–13 September 2013

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dubnick, M.J.: Accountability as a Cultural Keyword, pp. 23–38. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dubnick, M.J., Justice, J.B.: Accounting for accountability, September 2004. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b204/36ed2c186568612f99cb8383711c554e7c70.pdf. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association

  23. Ehren, M., Paterson, A., Baxter, J.: Accountability and trust: two sides of the same coin? J. Educ. Change 21(1), 183–213 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09352-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Elder-Vass, D.: The Causal Power of Social Structures: Emergence, Structure and Agency. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme and of the United Nations Population Fund: The UNDP accountability system, accountability framework and oversight policy. Technical report DP/2008/16/Rev.1, United Nations (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Feltus, C.: Aligning access rights to governance needs with the responsibility metamodel (ReMMo) in the frame of enterprise architecture. Ph.D. thesis, University of Namur, Belgium (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Garfinkel, H.: Studies in Ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Grant, R.W., Keohane, R.O.: Accountability and abuses of power in world politics. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 99(1), 29–43 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gundlach, G.T., Cannon, J.P.: “Trust but verify”? The performance implications of verification strategies in trusting relationships. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 38(4), 399–417 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0180-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Haller, P., Sommers, F.: Actors in Scala - Concurrent Programming for the Multi-core Era. Artima, Walnut Creek (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Halpin, T., Morgan, T.: Information Modeling and Relational Databases. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Burlington (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hübner, J.F., Boissier, O., Bordini, R.H.: A normative programming language for multi-agent organisations. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 62(1), 27–53 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-011-9251-0

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Huynh, T.D., Jennings, N.R., Shadbolt, N.R.: An integrated trust and reputation model for open multi-agent systems. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 13(2), 119–154 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ioannou, P.A., Sun, J.: Robust Adaptive Control. Courier Corporation, North Chelmsford (2012)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Kalia, A.K., Zhang, Z., Singh, M.P.: Estimating trust from agents’ interactions via commitments. In: Schaub, T., Friedrich, G., O’Sullivan, B. (eds.) ECAI 2014 - 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 18–22 August 2014, Prague, Czech Republic - Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems (PAIS 2014). Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 263, pp. 1043–1044. IOS Press (2014). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-1043

  36. Marengo, E., Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Chopra, A., Patti, V., Singh, M.: Commitments with regulations: reasoning about safety and control in REGULA. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), vol. 2, pp. 467–474 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Platon, E., Sabouret, N., Honiden, S.: Challenges for exception handling in multi-agent systems. In: Choren, R., Garcia, A., Giese, H., Leung, H., Lucena, C., Romanovsky, A. (eds.) SELMAS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4408, pp. 41–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73131-3_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Rawls, A.W.: Harold Garfinkel, ethnomethodology and workplace studies. Organ. Stud. 29(5), 701–732 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sommerville, I., Lock, R., Storer, T., Dobson, J.: Deriving information requirements from responsibility models. In: van Eck, P., Gordijn, J., Wieringa, R. (eds.) CAiSE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5565, pp. 515–529. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02144-2_40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Sustainable Energy for All Initiative: Accountability framework. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1644se4all.pdf

  41. Timm, I.J., Scholz, T., Herzog, O., Krempels, K.H., Spaniol, O.: From agents to multiagent systems. In: Kirn, S., Herzog, O., Lockemann, P., Spaniol, O. (eds.) Multiagent Engineering. INFOSYS, pp. 35–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32062-8_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Winikoff, M.: Towards trusting autonomous systems. In: El Fallah-Seghrouchni, A., Ricci, A., Son, T.C. (eds.) EMAS 2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10738, pp. 3–20. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91899-0_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Woods, D.D.: The risks of autonomy: Doyle’s catch. J. Cogn. Eng. Decis. Mak. 10(2), 131–133 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R., Kinny, D.: The GAIA methodology for agent-oriented analysis and design. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 3(3), 285–312 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:101007191086910.1023/A:1010071910869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Yazdanpanah, V., Dastani, M.: Distant group responsibility in multi-agent systems. In: Baldoni, M., Chopra, A.K., Son, T.C., Hirayama, K., Torroni, P. (eds.) PRIMA 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9862, pp. 261–278. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44832-9_16

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Zahran, M.: Accountability Frameworks in the United Nations System (2011). https://www.unjiu.org/sites/www.unjiu.org/files/jiu_document_files/products/en/reports-notes/JIU%20Products/JIU_REP_2011_5_English.pdf. UN Report

  47. Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.: Developing multiagent systems: the Gaia methodology. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 12(3), 317–370 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their feedback, that helped to improve the paper, and Olivier Boissier and Stefano Tedeschi for the helpful discussions and support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica, Università degli Studi di Torino, Turin, Italy

    Matteo Baldoni, Cristina Baroglio & Roberto Micalizio

Authors
  1. Matteo Baldoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristina Baroglio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roberto Micalizio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cristina Baroglio .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Informatica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Torino, Italy

    Cristina Baroglio

  2. Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Santa Catarina, Brazil

    Jomi F. Hubner

  3. School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

    Michael Winikoff

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

Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Micalizio, R. (2020). Fragility and Robustness in Multiagent Systems. In: Baroglio, C., Hubner, J.F., Winikoff, M. (eds) Engineering Multi-Agent Systems. EMAS 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12589. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66534-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66534-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-66533-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-66534-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation