Advertisement

Reasoning about the Intentions of Agents

  • Justin Blount
  • Michael Gelfond
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7360)

Abstract

In this paper we further develop the formal theory of intentions suggested by C. Baral and M. Gelfond in 2005. In this work the authors formalized the behavior of an agent intending to execute a sequence of actions. The resulting axioms for intentions written in Knowledge Representation language Answer Set Prolog allowed to easily express such properties of intentions as persistence and non-procrastination. This paper expands this work to allow reasoning with intentions in the presence of unexpected observations, and intentions to achieve goals. The theory is formulated in the extension of Answer Set Prolog, called CR-Prolog.

Keywords

Logic Program Logic Programming Current Step Intended Action Unexpected Observation 
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.
    Balduccini, M., Gelfond, M.: The aaa architecture: An overview. In: AAAI Spring Symposium on Architecture of Intelligent Theory-Based Agents (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balduccini, M.: CR-MODELS: An Inference Engine for CR-Prolog. In: Baral, C., Brewka, G., Schlipf, J. (eds.) LPNMR 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4483, pp. 18–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balduccini, M., Gelfond, M.: Diagnostic reasoning with A-Prolog. Journal of Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) 3(4-5), 425–461 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balduccini, M., Gelfond, M.: Logic Programs with Consistency-Restoring Rules. In: Doherty, P., McCarthy, J., Williams, M.-A. (eds.) International Symposium on Logical Formalization of Commonsense Reasoning. AAAI 2003 Spring Symposium Series, pp. 9–18 (March 2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baral, C.: Knowledge Representation, Reasoning, and Declarative Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baral, C., Gelfond, M.: Reasoning Agents in Dynamic Domains. In: Workshop on Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence. Kluwer Academic Publishers (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baral, C., Gelfond, M.: Reasoning about Intended Actions. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2005, pp. 689–694 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baral, C., Gelfond, M., Rushton, N.: Probabilistic reasoning with answer sets. Journal of Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP) 9(1), 57–144 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cohen, Levesque: Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42, 213–261 (1990)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gabaldon, A.: Activity recognition with intended actions. In: IJCAI, pp. 1696–1701 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gebser, M., Kaminski, R., Kaufmann, B., Ostrowski, M., Schaub, T., Schneider, M.: Potassco: The Potsdam answer set solving collection. Aicom 24(2), 105–124 (2011)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gelfond, M., Inclezan, D.: Yet Another Modular Action Language. In: Proceedings of SEA 2009, pp. 64–78. University of Bath Opus: Online Publications Store (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical Negation in Logic Programs and Disjunctive Databases. New Generation Computing 9, 365–385 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Action Languages. Electronic Transactions on AI 3 (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gelfond, M., Rushton, N.: Causal and probabilistic reasoning in p-log. In: Dechter, R., Gener, H., Halpern, J. (eds.) Heuristics, Probabilities and Causality. A tribute to Judea Pearl, pp. 337–359. College Publications (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Inclezan, D.: Computing Trajectories of Dynamic Systems Using ASP and Flora-2. Paper presented at NonMon@30: Thirty Years of Nonmonotonic Reasoning Conference, Lexington, Kentucky, October 22-25 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kakas, A., Mancarella, P., Sadri, F., Stathis, K., Toni, F.: Computational logic foundations of kgp agents. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 285–348 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kowalski, R., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. New Generation Computing 4, 67–95 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Faber, W., Calimeri, F., Dell’Armi, T., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Ianni, G., Ielpa, G., Koch, C., Perri, S., Polleres, A.: The DLV System. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 537–540. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marek, V.W., Truszczynski, M.: Stable models and an alternative logic programming paradigm. In: The Logic Programming Paradigm: a 25-Year Perspective, pp. 375–398. Springer, Berlin (1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.: Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence. In: Machine Intelligence, pp. 463–502. Edinburgh University Press (1969)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Niemela, I., Simons, P.: Extending the Smodels System with Cardinality and Weight Constraints. In: Logics in Artificial Intelligence. Kluwer Academic Publishers (2000)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Niemela, I.: Logic Programs with Stable Model Semantics as a Constraint Programming Paradigm. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Aspects of Nonmonotonic Reasoning, pp. 72–79 (June 1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Parra, P.P., Nayak, A.C., Demolombe, R.: Theories of Intentions in the Framework of Situation Calculus. In: Leite, J., Omicini, A., Torroni, P., Yolum, p. (eds.) DALT 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3476, pp. 19–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    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, pp. 42–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reiter, R.: On Closed World Data Bases. In: Logic and Data Bases, pp. 119–140. Plenum Press (1978)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action – Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press (2001)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wooldridge, M.: Reasoning About Rational Agents. The MIT Press (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Justin Blount
    • 1
  • Michael Gelfond
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA

Personalised recommendations