A Model-Driven Approach for Executing Modular Interaction Protocols Using BDI-Agents

  • Esteban León-Soto
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 98)


To achieve interoperability between systems belonging to distributed organizations, a mechanism to rule how they interact with each other, without loosing their autonomy and keeping communication as flexible as possible, is necessary. In Multi-Agent Systems, interaction protocols were invented for this purpose. Simple UML-like diagrams have been used, focusing mostly in the specification of the sequence in which messages can be exchanged and who they can be sent to. Relevant details have been left out, making these models easy to understand for the reader, but at the same time less flexible, reusable, machine readable and hard to use for automatic development where more insights on the semantics of the model are necessary. We propose a declarative and more expressive model which makes use of well known contributions of the area of Multi-Agents. Adding more details inevitably increases complexity and to deal with it, we propose a model-driven tool. The tool is composed two parts, one is a graphical editor, which visualizes the semantics and effects of the definitions made by the designer, in real time and using planing algorithms. The other is an automatic code generator that produces Jadex BDI agents. Models created using our tool are more expressive, reusable, modular and can be used in automated development.


Interaction Protocols Interoperability Service Contracts Business Process Modelling Modularity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    FIPA: FIPA interaction protocols specification. Technical report, Foundation For Intelligent Physical Agents, FIPA (2002),
  2. 2.
    Fischer, K., Müller, J.P., Odell, J., Berre, A.J. (eds.): Agent-Based Technologies and Applications for Enterprise Interoperability. LNBIP, vol. 25. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    León-Soto, E.: Modelling Interaction Protocols as Modular and Reusable 1st Class Objects. In: Fischer, K., Müller, J.P., Odell, J., Berre, A.J. (eds.) Agent-Based Technologies and Applications for Enterprise Interoperability. LNBIP, vol. 25, pp. 174–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Perrault, R., Cohen, P.R.: Elements of a plan-based theory of speech acts. Readings in Natural Language Processing, 423–440 (1986)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: Dialogue Game Protocols. In: Huget, M.-P. (ed.) Communication in Multiagent Systems. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2650, pp. 269–283. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hahn, C., Mora, C.M., Fischer, K.: A platform-independent metamodel for multiagent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 18(2), 239–266 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hahn, C.: A domain specific modeling language for multiagent systems. In: Padgham, L., Parkes, C.P., Müller, J.P., Parsons, S. (eds.) Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2008), pp. 233–240 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hahn, C., Fischer, K.: The Formal Semantics of the Domain Specific Modeling Language for Multiagent Systems. In: Luck, M., Gomez-Sanz, J.J. (eds.) AOSE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5386, pp. 145–158. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Warwas, S., Hahn, C.: The Platform Independent Modeling Language for Multiagent Systems. In: Fischer, K., Müller, J.P., Odell, J., Berre, A.J. (eds.) ATOP 2009. LNBIP, vol. 25, pp. 129–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hahn, C., Madrigal-Mora, C., Fischer, K., Elvesæter, B., Berre, A., Zinnikus, I.: Meta-models, Models, and Model Transformations: Towards Interoperable Agents. In: Fischer, K., Timm, I.J., André, E., Zhong, N. (eds.) MATES 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4196, pp. 123–134. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mallya, A.U., Huhns, M.N.: Commitments among agents. IEEE Internet Computing 7(4), 91–94 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Desai, N., Mallya, A.U., Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: OWL-P: a methodology for business process modeling and enactment. In: Workshop on Agent Oriented Information Systems, pp. 50–57 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Miller, T., McBurney, P.: Using Constraints and Process Algebra for Specification of First-Class Agent Interaction Protocols. In: O’Hare, G.M.P., Ricci, A., O’Grady, M.J., Dikenelli, O. (eds.) ESAW 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4457, pp. 245–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pokahr, A., Braubach, L., Lamersdorf, W.: Jadex: A BDI reasoning engine. In: Bordini, M.D.R., Seghrouchni, A.E.F. (eds.) Multi-Agent Programming, pp. 149–174. Springer Science+Business Media Inc., USA (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    OMG: Querry view transformation (2008),
  16. 16.
    Smith, R.G.: The contract net protocol: High-Level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 185–192 (1979)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Len-Soto, E.: FIPA agents messaging grounded on web services. In: Grid Services Engineering and Management (GSEM). LNI, vol. P-88 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    León Soto, E.: Agent Communication Using Web Services, a New FIPA Message Transport Service for Jade. In: Petta, P., Müller, J.P., Klusch, M., Georgeff, M. (eds.) MATES 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4687, pp. 73–84. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Esteban León-Soto
    • 1
  1. 1.DFKI GmbHGermany

Personalised recommendations