Advertisement

A Retrospective on the Reactive Event Calculus and Commitment Modeling Language

  • Paolo Torroni
  • Federico Chesani
  • Paola Mello
  • Marco Montali
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7169)

Abstract

Social commitments in time: Satisfied or compensated was the title of a presentation given at the 7th DALT workshop edition [34] in which we proposed a layered architecture for modeling and reasoning about social commitments. We gave emphasis to modularity and to the need of accommodating certain temporal aspects in order for a commitment modeling framework to be flexible enough to adapt to diverse commitment theories, and expressive enough to model realistic scenarios. We grounded the framework on two formalisms: the Reactive Event Calculus (\(\mathcal{REC}\)) and the Commitment Modeling Language (\(\mathcal{CML}\)). In this retrospective, we review recent developments of this line of work, and discuss our contribution in a broader context of related research.

Keywords

Multiagent System Constitutive Rule Agent Interaction Computational Logic Social Commitment 
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.
    Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Verifiable agent interaction in abductive logic programming: the SCIFF framework. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 9(4), 1–43 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Artikis, A., Skarlatidis, A., Portet, F., Paliouras, G.: Logic-based event recognition. Knowledge Engineering Review (to appear)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Marengo, E.: Behavior-oriented commitment-based protocols. In: Proc. 19th ECAI. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 215, pp. 137–142. IOS Press (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Marengo, E.: Constraints among commitments: Regulative specification of interaction protocols. In: Proc. AC 2010, Toronto, Canada, pp. 2–18 (May 2010), http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~bentahar/AC2010/AC2010.htm
  5. 5.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Marengo, E.: Commitment-Based Protocols with Behavioral Rules and Correctness Properties of MAS. In: Omicini, A., Sardina, S., Vasconcelos, W. (eds.) DALT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6619, pp. 60–77. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Marengo, E., Patti, V.: Constitutive and regulative specifications of commitment protocols: A decoupled approach. ACM Transactions on on Intelligent Systems and Technology (to appear)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bragaglia, S., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Reactive event calculus for monitoring global computing applications. In: Essays in Honour of Marek Sergot: Computational Logic for Normative Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (to appear)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Castelfranchi, C.: Commitments: From individual intentions to groups and organizations. In: Proc. 1st ICMAS, pp. 41–48. The MIT Press (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Commitment tracking via the reactive event calculus. In: Proc. 21st IJCAI, pp. 91–96. AAAI (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: A REC-based commitment tracking tool. In: 10th AI*IA/TABOO Italian Joint Workshop “From Objects to Agents”, WOA 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: A logic-based, reactive calculus of events. Fundamenta Informaticae 105(1-2), 135–161 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Role Monitoring in Open Agent Societies. In: Jędrzejowicz, P., Nguyen, N.T., Howlet, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES-AMSTA 2010, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6070, pp. 112–121. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M., Torroni, P.: Monitoring time-aware commitments within agent-based simulation environments. Cybernetics and Systems 42(7), 546–566 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chopra, A.K., Singh, M.P.: Elements of a Business-Level Architecture for Multiagent Systems. In: Braubach, L., Briot, J.-P., Thangarajah, J. (eds.) ProMAS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5919, pp. 15–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dovier, A., Formisano, A., Pontelli, E.: An investigation of multi-agent planning in clp. Fundamenta Informaticae 105(1-2), 79–103 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    El-Menshawy, M., Bentahar, J., Dssouli, R.: Verifiable Semantic Model for Agent Interactions Using Social Commitments. In: Dastani, M., El Fallah Segrouchni, A., Leite, J., Torroni, P. (eds.) LADS 2009. LNCS, vol. 6039, pp. 128–152. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fisher, M., Bordini, R.H., Hirsch, B., Torroni, P.: Computational logics and agents: A road map of current technologies and future trends. Computational Intelligence 23(1), 61–91 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language. In: Proc. 1st AAMAS, pp. 536–542. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gunay, A., Yolum, P.: Detecting Conflicts in Commitments. In: Sakama, C., et al. (eds.) DALT 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7169, pp. 51–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kafalı, Ö., Chesani, F., Torroni, P.: What Happened to My Commitment? Exception Diagnosis among Misalignment and Misbehavior. In: Dix, J., Leite, J., Governatori, G., Jamroga, W. (eds.) CLIMA XI. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6245, pp. 82–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kafali, O., Torroni, P.: Diagnosing commitments: delegation revisited (extended abstract). In: Proc. 10th AAMAS, IFAAMAS, pp. 1175–1176 (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kafalı, Ö., Torroni, P.: Social Commitment Delegation and Monitoring. In: Leite, J., Torroni, P., Ågotnes, T., Boella, G., van der Torre, L. (eds.) CLIMA XII 2011. LNCS, vol. 6814, pp. 171–189. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kafali, O., Yolum, P.: A distributed treatment of exceptions in multiagent contracts (preliminary report). In: Proc. 9th DALT, pp. 65–78 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mallya, A.U., Yolum, p., Singh, M.P.: Resolving Commitments among Autonomous Agents. In: Dignum, F.P.M. (ed.) ACL 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2922, pp. 166–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marengo, E., Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Chopra, A.K., Patti, V., Singh, M.P.: Commitments with regulations: Reasoning about safety and control in Regula. In: Proc. 10th AAMAS, IFAAMAS, pp. 843–850 (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Menshawy, M.E., Bentahar, J., Qu, H., Dssouli, R.: On the verification of social commitments and time. In: Proc. 10th AAMAS, IFAAMAS, pp. 483–490 (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Montali, M.: Specification and Verification of Declarative Open Interaction Models. A Logic-Based Approach. LNBIP, vol. 56, pp. 383–385. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Montali, M., Torroni, P., Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P.: Verification from Declarative Specifications Using Logic Programming. In: Garcia de la Banda, M., Pontelli, E. (eds.) ICLP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5366, pp. 440–454. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Patkos, T.: A formal theory for reasoning about action, knowledge and time. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Crete, Greece (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Patkos, T., Plexousakis, D.: Efficient epistemic reasoning in partially observable dynamic domains using hidden causal dependencies. In: Proc. 9th NRAC, pp. 55–62 (2011), http://ijcai-11.iiia.csic.es/files/proceedings/W4-NRAC11-Proceedings.pdf#page=59
  31. 31.
    Singh, M.P.: An ontology for commitments in multiagent systems: Toward a unification of normative concepts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7, 97–113 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Son, T., Pontelli, E., Sakama, C.: Formalizing Commitments Using Action Languages. In: Sakama, C., et al. (eds.) DALT 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7169, pp. 67–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Son, T., Pontelli, E., Sakama, C.: Formalizing commitments using action languages. In: Proc. 10th Symposium on Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning. AAAI Spring Symposium Series. Stanford University (2011)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Torroni, P., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Montali, M.: Social Commitments in Time: Satisfied or Compensated. In: Baldoni, M., Bentahar, J., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Lloyd, J. (eds.) DALT 2009. LNCS, vol. 5948, pp. 228–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Torroni, P., Yolum, P., Singh, M.P., Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P.: Modelling interactions via commitments and expectations. In: Handbook of Research on Multi-Agent Systems: Semantics and Dynamics of Organizational Models, pp. 263–284. IGI Global, Hershey (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Urovi, V., Bromuri, S., Stathis, K., Artikis, A.: Run-time support for norm-governed systems. Technical Report CSD-TR-10-01, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK (2010), http://golem.cs.rhul.ac.uk/TR/CSD-TR-10-01.pdf
  37. 37.
    Yolum, P., Singh, M.: Flexible protocol specification and execution: applying event calculus planning using commitments. In: Proc. 1st AAMAS, pp. 527–534. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paolo Torroni
    • 1
  • Federico Chesani
    • 1
  • Paola Mello
    • 1
  • Marco Montali
    • 2
  1. 1.DISIUniversity of BolognaItaly
  2. 2.KRDBFree University of Bozen-BolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations