Advertisement

Towards a Formal Model of Knowledge Sharing in Complex Systems

  • Nadim Obeid
  • Asma Moubaiddin
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 260)

Abstract

Knowledge sharing between various components of a system is a prerequisite for a successful knowledge management system. A knowledge sharing model includes providing knowledge workers with the knowledge, experiences and insights which they need to perform their tasks. We propose a multi-agent system that assists in the process of knowledge sharing between concerned knowledge worker groups. Each agent is a knowledge broker and organizer for a specialized knowledge worker group involved in the operations of a sub-system. In addition to timely access to knowledge, it should help in understanding the motivation which underlies decisions made by other groups and/or the information/knowledge bases for such decisions. Each agent is expected to learn about the activities, contexts of decisions, knowledge employed and experiences of other knowledge workers groups whose activities are considered to be relevant to the group it represents. We shall employ Partial Information State (PIS) to represent the knowledge of the agents. We shall employ a three-valued based nonmonotonic logic for reasoning about PISs. We present a multi-agent based model of argumentation and dialogue for knowledge sharing.

Keywords

Knowledge Management Knowledge Sharing Multi-Agent Systems Three-Valued Logic Nonmonotonic Reasoning Dialogue Argumentation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abdullah, M., Benest, I., Evans, A., Kimble, C.: Knowledge Modeling Techniques for Developing Knowledge Management Systems. In: 3rd European Conference on Knowledge Management, Dublin, Ireland, pp. 15–25 (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akman, V., Surav, M.: Steps Toward Formalizing Context. AI Magazine, 55–72 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allen, T.: Managing the Flow of Technology. MIT Press, Cambridge (1977)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amgoud, L., Parsons, S., Maudet, N.: Arguments, Dialogue, and Negotiation. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2000), pp. 338–342 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ancona, D., Caldwell, D.: Bridging The Boundary: External Activity and Performance In Organizational Teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37, 634–665 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Argote, L., McEvily, B., Reagans: Managing Knowledge In Organizations: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge. Management Sci. 49(4) (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Argote, L., Ingram, P., Levine, J., Moreland, R.: Knowledge Transfer in Organizations. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes 82(1), 1–8 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baumard, P.: Tacit Knowledge in Organizations. Sage, London (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Truth and Consequence: Complementing Logic with Value in Legal Reasoning. Information and Communications Technology Law 10(1) (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Benerecetti, M., Bouquet, P., Ghidini, C.: Formalizing Belief Reports – the Approach and a Case Study. In: Giunchiglia, F. (ed.) AIMSA 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1480, pp. 62–75. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benerecetti, M., Bouquet, P., Ghidini, C.: Contextual Reasoning Distilled. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 12(3), 279–305 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Booch, G.: Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brooking, A.: Corporate Memory: Strategies for Knowledge Management. International Thomson Business Press, London (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bunderson, J., Sutcliffe, K.: Comparing Alternative Conceptualizations of Functional Diversity in Management Teams. Acad. Management J. 45(5), 875–893 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Castefranchi, C.: Modelling Social Action for AI Agents. Artificial Intelligence 103(1–2), 157–182 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cohen, S., Bailey, D.: What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite. J. Management 23(3), 239–264 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crossan, M., Lane, H.W., White, R.E.: An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution. Academy of Management Review 24(3), 522–537 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Davenport, T., Prusak, L.: Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage what they Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    De Boer, F., Van Eijk, R.M., Van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.: A Fully Abstract Model for the Exchange of Information in Multi-Agent Systems. Theoretical Computer Science 290(3), 1753–1773 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Durfee, E.H.: Practically Coordinating. Artificial Intelligence Magazine 20(1), 99–116 (1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dung, P.: The Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Logic Programming and N-Person Game. Artificial Intelligence 77, 321–357 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dung, P.: An Argumentation Theoretic Foundation of Logic Programming. Journal of Logic Programming 22, 151–177 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Elvang-Gøransson, M., Krause, P., Fox, J.: Dialectic Reasoning with Inconsistent Information. In: Heckerman, D., Mamdani, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 114–121 (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Faraj, S., Sproull, L.: Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams. Management Sci. 46(12), 1554–1568 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Faratin, P.: Automated Service Negotiation Between Autonomous Computational Agents. PhD thesis, University of London, Queen Mary and Westfield College, Department of Electronic Engineering (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fatima, S., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Multi-Issue Negotiation under Time Constraints. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-2002), pp. 143–150 (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ferber, J.: Multi-Agent Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Finin, T., Labrou, Y., Mayfield, J.: KQML as an Agent Communication Language. In: Bradshaw, J.M. (ed.) Software Agent, pp. 291–315. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1995)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    FIPA-ACL. Communicative Act Library Specification. Technical Report XC00037H, Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gasser, L.: Social Conceptions of Knowledge and Action: DAI Foundations and Open System Semantics. Artificial Intelligence 47(1–3), 107–138 (1991)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Giunchiglia, F.: Contextual Reasoning. Epistemologia, XVI, 345–364 (1993)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Grice, H.: Logic and Conversation. In: Davidson, D., Harman, G. (eds.) The Logic of Grammar, Encino, California, Dickenson, pp. 64–75 (1975)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Guha, R.V.: Contexts: A Formalization and some Applications. PhD thesis. Stanford University (1991)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hansen, M.: The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge Across Organization Subunits. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44, 82–111 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hansen, M.: Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies. Organ. Sci. 13(3), 232–248 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Heaton, L., Taylor, J.: Knowledge Management and Professional Work. A Communication Perspective on the Knowledge-Based Organization, Management Communication Quarterly 16(2), 210–236 (2002)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jennings, N.R.: Commitments and Conventions: The Foundation of Coordination in Multi-Agent Systems. Knowledge Engineering Review 8(3), 223–250 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.: Agent-Oriented Software Engineering. In: Bradshaw, J. (ed.) Handbook of Agent Technology. AAAI/MIT Press (2000)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kakas, A., Moraitis, P.: Argumentation Based Decision Making for Autonomous Agents. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2003), pp. 883–890 (2003)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kowalczyk, R., Bui, V.: On Constraint-Based Reasoning in e-Negotiation Agents. In: Dignum, F.P.M., Cortés, U. (eds.) AMEC 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2003, pp. 31–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kraus, S.: Strategic Negotiation in Multi-Agent Environments. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kraus, S., Sycara, K., Evenchik, A.: Reaching Agreements through Argumentation: A Logical Model and Implementation. Artificial Intelligence 104(1–2), 1–69 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lenat, D.B., Guha, R.V.: Building Large Knowledge Based Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1990)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Luo, X., Zhang, C., Jennings, N.R.: A Hybrid Model for Sharing Information between Fuzzy, Uncertain and Default Reasoning Models in Multi-Agent Systems. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 10(4), 401–450 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: A denotational semantics for deliberation dialogues. In: Rahwan, I., Moraïtis, P., Reed, C. (eds.) ArgMAS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3366, pp. 162–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mietlewski, Z., Walkowiak, R.: Knowledge and Life Cycle of an Organization. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management 5(4) (2007)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Moubaiddin, A., Obeid, N.: Partial Information Basis for Agent-Based Collaborative Dialogue. Applied Intelligence 30(2), 142–167 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Moubaiddin, A., Obeid, N.: Dialogue and Argumentation in Multi-Agent Diagnosis. In: Nguyen, N.T., Katarzyniak, R. (eds.) New Challenges in Applied Intelligence Technologies. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol. 134, pp. 13–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Moubaiddin, A., Obeid, N.: Towards a Formal Model of knowledge Acquisition via Cooperative Dialogue. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (2007)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Moulin, B., Chaib-Draa, B.: A Review of Distributed Artificial Intelligence. In: O’Hare, G., Jennings, N.R. (eds.) Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence, ch. 1, pp. 3–55. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nelson, R., Winter, S.: An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1982)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Newell, A.: The Knowledge Level. Artificial Intelligence 18, 87–127 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H.: The knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Obeid, N.: A Formalism for Representing and Reasoning with Temporal Information, Event and Change. In: Applied Intelligence, Special Issue on Temporal Uncertainty, vol. 23(2), pp. 109–119. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2005)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Obeid, N.: A Model-Theoretic Semantics for Default Logic. WSEAS Transactions on Computers 4(6), 581–590 (2005)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Obeid, N.: Towards a Model of Learning Through Communication, Knowledge and Information Systems, vol. 2, pp. 498–508. Springer, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Obeid, N.: Three Valued Logic and Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Computers and Artificial Intelligence 15(6), 509–530 (1996)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Panzarasa, P., Jennings, N.R.: Social Influence, Negotiation and Cognition. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 10(5–7), 417–453 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Panzarasa, P., Jennings, N.R., Norman, T.J.: Formalising Collaborative Decision Making and Practical Reasoning in Multi-Agent Systems. Journal of Logic and Computation 12(1), 55–117 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Parsons, S., Sierra, C., Jennings, N.: Agents that Reason and Negotiate by Arguing. Journal of Logic and Computation 8(3), 261–292 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Parsons, S., Wooldridge, M., Amgoud, L.: On the Outcomes of Formal Inter-Agent Dialogues. In: 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Polanyi, M.: The Tacit Dimension. Doubleday, New York (1966)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Prakken, H.: Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15(6), 1009–1040 (2005)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: The Role of Logic in Computational Models of Legal Argument: A Criticial Survey. In: Kakas, A., Sadri, F. (eds.) Learning-Based Robot Vision. LNCS, vol. 2048, pp. 342–343. Springer, Berlin (2001)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Pynadath, D., Tambe, M.: Multiagent Teamwork: Analyzing Key Teamwork Theories and Models. In: Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems (AAMAS 2002), pp. 873–880 (2002)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rahwan, I., Ramchurn, S., Jennings, N., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., Sonenberg, L.: Argumentation-Based Negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18, 343–375 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rahwan, I.: Interest-based negotiation in multi-agent systems, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia (2004)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Reed, C.A., Long, D., Fox, M., Garagnani, M.: Persuasion as a Form of Inter-Agent Negotiation. In: Lukose, D., Zhang, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd Australian Workshop on DAI. Springer, Berlin (1997)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Reiter, R.: A Logic for Default Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13, 81–132 (1980)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rulke, D., Galaskiewicz, J.: Distribution of Knowledge, Group Network Structure, and Group Performance. Management Sci., 46(5), 612–625 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sandholm, T.: EMediator: A Next Generation Electronic Commerce Server, Computational Intelligence. Special Issue on Agent Technology for Electronic Commerce 18(4), 656–676 (2002)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sierra, C., Jennings, N.R., Noriega, P., Parsons, S.: A Framework for Argumentation-Based Negotiation. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1365, pp. 177–192. Springer, Berlin (1998)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Straub, D., Karahanna, E.: Knowledge Worker Communications and Recipient Availability: Toward a Task Closure Explanation of Media Choice. Organization Science 9(2), 160–175 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Szulanski, G.: The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 82(1), 9–27 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Tushman, M.: Impacts of Perceived Environmental Variability on Patterns of Work Related Communication. Acad. Management J. 22(1), 482–500 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    van Elst, L., Dignum, V., Abecker, A.: Towards Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management. In: van Elst, L., Dignum, V., Abecker, A. (eds.) AMKM 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2926, pp. 1–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Walton, D.N., Krabbe, E.C.W.: Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, NY (1995)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wooldridge, M., Parsons, S.: Languages for negotiation. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 393–400 (2000)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Zack, M.: Managing Codified Knowledge. Slaon Management Review 40(4), 45–58 (1999)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Zander, U., Kogut, B.: Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organ. Sci. 6(1), 76–92 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadim Obeid
    • 1
  • Asma Moubaiddin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Information Systems, King Abdullah II School for Information TechnologyThe University of Jordan 
  2. 2.Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Foreign LanguagesThe University of Jordan 

Personalised recommendations