Advertisement

Answer Set Modules for Logical Agents

  • Stefania Costantini
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6702)

Abstract

Various approaches exist to the application of Answer Set Programming (ASP) in the agent realm. Nonetheless, a controversial point is how to combine answer set modules with the other modules an agent is composed of, considering that an agent can be seen as a set of “capabilities” that in suitable combination produce the overall agent behavior as an emergent behavior. In this paper, we outline a possible fruitful integration of ASP into many agent architectures, by introducing two kinds of modules: one that allows for complex reaction, the other one that allows for reasoning about necessity and possibility.

Keywords

Logic Program Multiagent System Logic Programming Ground Atom Agent Architecture 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baral, C.: Knowledge representation, reasoning and declarative problem solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anger, C., Schaub, T., Truszczyński, M.: ASPARAGUS – the Dagstuhl Initiative. ALP Newsletter 17(3) (2004), http://asparagus.cs.uni-potsdam.de
  3. 3.
    Leone, N.: Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning: From theory to systems and applications. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4483, p. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Truszczyński, M.: Logic programming for knowledge representation. In: Dahl, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) ICLP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4670, pp. 76–88. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gelfond, M.: Answer sets. In: Handbook of Knowledge Representation, ch. 7. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Action languages. ETAI, Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (6) (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baral, C., Gelfond, M.: Reasoning agents in dynamic domains. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Workshop on Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence, pp. 257–279. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baral, C., McIlraith, S., Son, T.C.: Formulating diagnostic problem solving using an action language with narratives and sensing. In: Proc. of the Int. Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KRR 2000), pp. 311–322 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Balduccini, M.: Answer Set Based Design of Highly Autonomous, Rational Agents. PhD thesis (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Balduccini, M., Gelfond, M.: The AAA architecture: An overview. In: AAAI Spring Symposium 2008 on Architectures for Intelligent Theory-Based Agents, AITA 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F.: From logic programming towards multi-agent systems. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25(3-4), 391–419 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gelfond, G., Watson, R.: Modeling cooperative multi-agent systems. In: Costantini, S., Watson, R. (eds.) Proc. of ASP 2007, 4th International Workshop on Answer Set Programming at ICLP 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Vos, M., Vermeir, D.: Extending answer sets for logic programming agents. Annals of Mathematics and Artifical Intelligence, Special Issue on Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems 42(1-3), 103–139 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alferes, J.J., Brogi, A., Leite, J.A., Pereira, L.M.: Evolving logic programs. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 50–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alferes, J.J., Dell’Acqua, P., Pereira, L.M.: A compilation of updates plus preferences. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 62–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baral, C., Gelfond, G., Son, T.C., Pontelli, E.: Using answer set programming to model multi-agent scenarios involving agents’ knowledge about other’s knowledge. In: Proc. of the 9th Int. Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2010), Copyright 2010 by the International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, IFAAMAS (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.: Modeling rational agents within a bdi-architecture. In: Proc. of the Second Intl. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1991), pp. 473–484. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rao, A.S.: Agentspeak(l): BDI agents speak out in a logical computable language. In: Perram, J., Van de Velde, W. (eds.) MAAMAW 1996. LNCS, vol. 1038. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hindriks, K.V., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.C.: Agent programming in 3APL. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2(4) (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fisher, M.: Metatem: The story so far. In: Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M.M., Dix, J., El Fallah Seghrouchni, A. (eds.) PROMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3862, pp. 3–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Subrahmanian, V.S., Bonatti, P., Dix, J., Eiter, T., Kraus, S., Ozcan, F., Ross, R.: Heterogeneous Agent Systems. MIT Press/AAAI Press, Cambridge, MA, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Costantini, S., Tocchio, A.: A logic programming language for multi-agent systems. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, p. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Costantini, S., Tocchio, A.: The DALI logic programming agent-oriented language. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3229, pp. 685–688. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kakas, A.C., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Toni, F.: The KGP model of agency. In: Proc. ECAI 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bracciali, A., Demetriou, N., Endriss, U., Kakas, A., Lu, W., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Terreni, G., Toni, F.: The KGP model of agency: Computational model and prototype implementation. In: Priami, C., Quaglia, P. (eds.) GC 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3267, pp. 340–367. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fisher, M., Bordini, R.H., Hirsch, B., Torroni, P.: Computational logics and agents: a road map of current technologies and future trends. Computational Intelligence Journal 23(1), 61–91 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kakas, A.C., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: The role of abduction in logic programming. In: Gabbay, D., Hogger, C., Robinson, A. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 5, pp. 235–324. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Baral, C., Son, T.: Relating theories of actions and reactive control. ETAI (Electronic Transactions of AI) 2(3-4), 211–271 (1998)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Costantini, S., Tocchio, A.: About declarative semantics of logic-based agent languages. In: Baldoni, M., Endriss, U., Omicini, A., Torroni, P. (eds.) DALT 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3904, pp. 106–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Costantini, S., Tocchio, A.: DALI: An architecture for intelligent logical agents. In: Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Architectures for Intelligent Theory-Based Agents (AITA 2008). AAAI Spring Symposium Series. AAAI Press, Stanford (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Costantini, S., D’Alessandro, S., Lanti, D., Tocchio, A.: Dali web site, download of the interpreter (2010); With the contribution of many undergraduate and graduate students of Computer Science, L’AquilaGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
    Ceri, S., Gottlob, G., Tanca, L.: What you always wanted to know about datalog (and never dared to ask). IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 1(1), 146–166 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dal Palù, A., Dovier, A., Pontelli, E., Rossi, G.: Answer set programming with constraints using lazy grounding. In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) ICLP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5649, pp. 115–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lefèvre, C., Nicolas, P.: A first order forward chaining approach for answer set computing. In: Erdem, E., Lin, F., Schaub, T. (eds.) LPNMR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5753, pp. 196–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Kowalski, R., Bowen, K. (eds.) Proc. of the 5th Intl. Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pp. 1070–1080. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9, 365–385 (1991)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Costantini, S.: On the existence of stable models of non-stratified logic programs. J. on Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 6(1-2) (2006)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Oikarinen, E.: Modularity in Answer Set Programs. Doctoral dissertation, TKK Dissertations in Information and Computer Science TKK-ICS-D7, Helsinki University of Technology, Faculty of Information and Natural Sciences, Department of Information and Computer Science, Espoo, Finland (2008) ISBN 978-951-22-9581-4Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Janhunen, T., Oikarinen, E., Tompits, H., Woltran, S.: Modularity aspects of disjunctive stable models. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4483, pp. 175–187. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Veith, H., Eiter, T., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: Modular logic programming and generalized quantifiers. In: Fuhrbach, U., Dix, J., Nerode, A. (eds.) LPNMR 1997. LNCS, vol. 1265, pp. 290–309. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dao-Tran, M., Eiter, T., Fink, M., Krennwallner, T.: Modular nonmonotonic logic programming revisited. In: Hill, P.M., Warren, D.S. (eds.) ICLP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5649, pp. 145–159. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tari, L., Baral, C., Anwar, S.: A language for modular answer set programming: Application to acc tournament scheduling. In: Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Answer Set Programming, ASP 2005. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 142, pp. 277–292 (2005)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Balduccini, M.: Modules and signature declarations for a-prolog: Progress report. In: Proc. of the Software Engineering for Answer Set Programming Workshop, SEA 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Baral, C., Dzifcak, J., Takahashi, H.: Macros, macro calls and use of ensembles in modular answer set programming. In: Etalle, S., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) ICLP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4079, pp. 376–390. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Calimeri, F., Ianni, G.: Template programs for disjunctive logic programming: An operational semantics. AI Communications 19Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Faber, W., Woltran, S.: Manifold answer-set programs for meta-reasoning. In: Erdem, E., Lin, F., Schaub, T. (eds.) LPNMR 2009. LNCS, vol. 5753, pp. 115–128. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gelfond, M.: Logic programming and reasoning with incomplete information. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 12 (1994)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zhang, Y.: Computational properties of epistemic logic programs. In: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proc. of the 10th Int. Conference (KR 2006), pp. 308–317. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhang, Y.: Epistemic reasoning in logic programs. In: Proc. of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2007, pp. 647–652 (2007)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    El-Khatib, O., Pontelli, E., Son, T.C.: Asp-prolog: a system for reasoning about answer set programs in prolog. In: Proc. of the 10th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning, NMR 2004, pp. 155–163 (2004)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: A uniform integration of higher-order reasoning and external evaluations in answer-set programming. In: Proc. of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2005, pp. 90–96 (2005)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Costantini, S., Lanzarone, G.A.: A metalogic programming language, pp. 218–233. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Barklund, J., Dell’Acqua, P., Costantini, S., Lanzarone, G.A.: Reflection principles in computational logic. J. of Logic and Computation 10(6), 743–786 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Eiter, T., Subrahmanian, V., Pick, G.: Heterogeneous active agents, i: Semantics. Artificial Intelligence 108(1-2), 179–255 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Luck, M., McBurney, P., Preist, C.: A manifesto for agent technology: Towards next generation computing. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Sytems 9, 203–252 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Fisher, M., Bordini, R.H., Hirsch, B., Torroni, P.: Computational logics and agents: a road map of current technologies and future trends. Computational Intelligence Journal 23(1), 61–91 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Costantini, S., Tocchio, A., Toni, F., Tsintza, P.: A multi-layered general agent model. In: Basili, R., Pazienza, M.T. (eds.) AI*IA 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4733, pp. 121–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kakas, A.C., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Toni, F.: Declarative agent control. In: Leite, J., Torroni, P. (eds.) CLIMA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3487, pp. 96–110. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kowalski, R., Sadri, F.: Towards a unified agent architecture that combines rationality with reactivity. In: Pedreschi, D., Zaniolo, C. (eds.) LID 1996. LNCS, vol. 1154, pp. 135–149. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Costantini, S., Dell’Acqua, P., Tocchio, A.: Expressing preferences declaratively in logic-based agent languages. In: McCarthy, J. (ed.) Proc. of Commonsense 2007, the 8th International Symposium on Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning. AAAI Spring Symposium Series, AAAI Press (2007) a Special Event in Honor, Stanford University (March 2007)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gabbay, D.M., Smets, P.: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000); edited collectionzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Blackburn, P., van Benthem, J., Wolter, F.: Handbook of Modal Logic. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006); collection of contributionszbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Van Gelder, A., Ross, K.A., Schlipf, J.: The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. Journal of the ACM (3) (1990)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Bowen, K.A., Kowalski, R.A.: Amalgamating language and metalanguage in logic programming. In: Clark, K.L., Tärnlund, S.Å. (eds.) Logic Programming, pp. 153–172. Academic Press, London (1982)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Marek, V.W., Truszczyński, M.: Autoepistemic logic. Journal of the ACM 38(3), 587–618 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Marek, V.W., Truszczyński, M.: Computing intersection of autoepistemic expansions. In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Logic Programming and Non Monotonic Reasoning, pp. 35–70. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Brewka, G., Eiter, T.: Equilibria in heterogeneous nonmonotonic multi-context systems. In: Proc. of the 22nd Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2007, pp. 385–390 (2007)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Nisar, M.A.: Integration of answer set programming modules with logical agents. Master’s thesis, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan (2010); Supervisor Prof. Stefania Costantini, University of L’Aquila, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Eiter, T., Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G.: Declarative problem-solving using the DLV system, pp. 79–103. Kluwer Academic Publishers, USA (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefania Costantini
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità degli Studi di L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly

Personalised recommendations