Model Driven Design of Multiagent Systems

  • Klaus Fischer
  • Stefan Warwas
  • Ingo Zinnikus
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 271)


In general software engineering modelling of software systems had a significant impact on the manner in which complex systems are designed. The Model Driven Architecture (MDA) proposed by the Object Management Group (OMG) provides a formal framework that allows to define dedicated modelling languages for different application domains. Already in the model driven design of service-oriented architectures one can identify concepts that are common in the design of such systems and what agent-based systems concerns. To directly use the MDA framework for the design of multiagent system (MAS) is therefore an obvious step. In this article we advocate the domain specific modelling language DSML4MAS for modelling MAS. However, our aim is not to just define the language, we propose a framework for DSML4MAS that allows its adaptation and dynamic development in the future. Our vision is that in the near future model repositories for model fragments that can be flexibly combined will be established and propose basic concepts that can support the development of MAS in this context. The interaction aspect is especially important in MAS design and one of the most obvious aspects where model exchange and model re-use is highly desirable. The article therefore presents the interaction aspect in more details and discusses the features that are available in the DSML4MAS.


Multiagent System Agent Instance Object Management Group Interaction Protocol Model Drive 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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Chopra, A.K., Desai, N., Patti, V., Singh, M.P.: Choice, interoperability, and conformance in interaction protocols and service choreographies. In: AAMAS (2), pp. 843–850 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bauer, B., Müller, J.P., Odell, J.: Agent UML: A Formalism for Specifying Multiagent Interaction. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1957, pp. 91–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bernon, C., Gleizes, M.-P., Peyruqueou, S., Picard, G.: ADELFE: A Methodology for Adaptive Multi-Agent Systems Engineering. In: Petta, P., Tolksdorf, R., Zambonelli, F. (eds.) ESAW 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2577, pp. 156–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chella, A., Cossentino, M., Sabatucci, L., Seidita, V.: From passi to agile passi: Tailoring a design process to meet new needs. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, IAT 2004, pp. 471–474. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2004), CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis, R., Smith, R.G.: Negotiation as a metaphor for distributed problem solving. Artificial Intelligence 20(1) (1983)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Desai, N., Singh, M.P.: On the enactability of business protocols. In: Fox, D., Gomes, C.P. (eds.) AAAI, pp. 1126–1131. AAAI Press (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hahn, C., et al.: A platform-independent metamodel for multiagent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 18, 239–266 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kapahnke, P., Liedtke, P., Nesbigall, S., Warwas, S., Klusch, M.: ISReal: An Open Platform for Semantic-Based 3D Simulations in the 3D Internet. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6497, pp. 161–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Khadka, R., Sapkota, B., Ferreira Pires, L., van Sinderen, M., Jansen, S.: Model-Driven Development of Service Compositions for Enterprise Interoperability. In: van Sinderen, M., Johnson, P. (eds.) IWEI 2011. LNBIP, vol. 76, pp. 177–190. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kone, M.T., Shimazu, A., Nakajima, T.: The state of the art in agent communication languages. Knowledge and Information Systems 2(3), 259–284 (2000), zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lam, S.S., Shankar, A.U.: Protocol verification via projections. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 10(4), 325–342 (1984)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McNeile, A.T.: Protocol contracts with application to choreographed multiparty collaborations. Service Oriented Computing and Applications 4(2), 109–136 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mendling, J., Hafner, M.: From WS-CDL choreography to BPEL process orchestration. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 21, 525–542 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Padgham, L., Thangarajah, J., Winikoff, M.: Tool support for agent development using the prometheus methodology. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Quality Software, QSIC 2005, pp. 383–388. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2005), CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Penserini, L., Perini, A., Susi, A., Mylopoulos, J.: From stakeholder intentions to software agent implementations. In: Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 465–479 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singh, M.P.: Multiagent Systems: A Theoretical Framework for Intentions, Know-How, and Communications. LNCS, vol. 799. Springer, Heidelberg (1994), zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thangarajah, J., Padgham, L.: Prometheus design tool. In: The 4th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 127–128 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Trencansky, I., Cervenka, R.: Agent modeling language (aml): A comprehensive approach to modelling mas. Informatica 29(4), 391–400 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Warwas, S., Hahn, C.: The DSML4MAS development environment. In: Proc. of the 8th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 1379–1380. IFAAMAS (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.: Developing multiagent systems: The gaia methodology. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 12(3), 317–370 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus Fischer
    • 1
  • Stefan Warwas
    • 1
  • Ingo Zinnikus
    • 1
  1. 1.German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI) GmbHSaarbrckenGermany

Personalised recommendations