Advertisement

Agent modelling in MetateM and DESIRE

  • Marco Mulder
  • Jan Treur
  • Michael Fisher
Section IV: Formal Methods
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1365)

Abstract

In spite of the rapid spread of agent technology, there is, as yet, little evidence of an engineering approach to the development of multi-agent systems. For example, both development methods and verification techniques for multi-agent systems are rare. In this paper, we describe a case study aimed at comparing two formal agent modelling languages, namely Concurrent MetateM and DESIRE. A version of the well known PRS architecture is developed and the approaches are compared with respect to this application.

Keywords

modelling specification architectures MetateM DESIRE 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., Hunter, A. Meta-Reasoning in Executable Logic. In Proceedings of Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., Owens, R., and Reynolds, M. (editors). The Imperative Future — Principles of Executable Temporal Logic. Research Studies Press, UK, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brazier, F. M. T., Treur, J., Wijngaards, N. J. E. and Willems, M., Formal specification of Hierarchically (De)Composed Tasks, Data and Knowledge Engineering, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brazier, F. M. T., Treur, J., Wijngaards, N. J. E. and Willems, M., Temporal semantics of complex reasoning tasks In Proceedings of the 10th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-based Systems workshop. KAW'96, Calgary. Extended version to appear in: Data and Knowledge Engineering, 1997Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brazier, F. M. T., Dunin-Keplicz, B. M., Jennings, N. R. and Treur, J., DESIRE: Modelling multiagent systems in a compositional formal framework, In International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 6(1):67–94, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burkhard, H. D., Liveness and Fairness Properties in Multi-Agent systems. In Proceedings 13th International Joint Conference on AI, Chambery, France, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cornelissen, F., Jonker, C., Treur, J., Compositional verification of knowledge based systems: a case study in diagnosis. In Proc. European Knowledge Acquisition Workshop, Lecture Notes in AI, Springer-Verlag, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher, M., Concurrent MetateM — A Language for Modelling Reactive Systems. In Parallel Architectures and Languages, Europe (PARLE), Munich, Germany, June 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisher M., A survey of Concurrent MetateM — The language and its applications. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Temporal Logic. Springer Verlag, July 1994.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisher, M., A Normal Form for Temporal Logic and its Application in Theorem-Proving and Execution. In Journal of Logic and Computation, 7(4), 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fisher, M., and Wooldridge, M., On the Formal Specification and Verification of Multi-Agent Systems. In International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 6(1), 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fisher, M. Implementing BDI Systems by Direct Execution. In Proceedings 15th International Joint Conference on AI, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Georgeff, M. P. and Lansky, A. L. Reactive Reasoning and Planning. In Proceedings of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), Morgan Kaufmann, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hindricks, K., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., and Meyer, J-J. Ch. Formal Semantics of an Abstract Agent Programming Language. In this volume.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jonker, C.M. and Treur, J. Compositional Verification of Multi-Agent Systems: a Formal Analysis of Pro-activeness and Reactiveness. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Compositionality (COMPOS97), Springer Verlag, to appear.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luck, M., d'Invemo, M. A Formal Framework for Agency and Autonomy. In Proceedings First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, AAAI Press/The MIT Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mulder, M. Comparing Agent Models in Concurrent MetateM and DESIRE. MSc Thesis, Department of Mathematics & Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    O'Hare, G. M. P. Agent Factory: An Environment for the Fabrication of Multi-Agent Systems. In: Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence Wiley Interscience, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. S. Rao and M. P. Georgeff. Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Mulder
    • 1
  • Jan Treur
    • 1
  • Michael Fisher
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of ComputingManchester Metropolitan UniversityManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations