Balancing ontological and operational factors in refining multiagent neighborhoods

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we present our work balancing ontological and operational factors in building collaborations within multiagent neighborhoods. This innovation takes into account the desired level of performance, service priorities, and relaying of tasks to determine whether an agent should entertain ontological learning, which are more expensive but more rewarding in the long run, or carry out operational learning, which are less expensive and more rewarding in the short term. The domain of application is multiagent, distributed information retrieval, where agents, safe-guarding information or data resources, improve their local services by collaborating with others. Each agent is capable of providing query services to its users, and is equipped with an ontology defining the concepts that it knows and the associated documents. When collaborating, an agent needs to determine which agents to approach and how to approach them. Experiments show that with balanced profile-based reinforcement learning (operational) and inference-based ontological learning, agents reach desired level of performance while improving the neighborhood health and communication cost.

REFERENCES

• 1: Ricardo A. Baeza-Yates , Berthier Ribeiro-Neto, Modern Information Retrieval, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1999
• 2: R. J. Bayardo, Jr. , W. Bohrer , R. Brice , A. Cichocki , J. Fowler , A. Helal , V. Kashyap , T. Ksiezyk , G. Martin , M. Nodine , M. Rashid , M. Rusinkiewicz , R. Shea , C. Unnikrishnan , A. Unruh , D. Woelk, InfoSleuth: agent-base semantic integration of information in open and dynamic environments, Readings in agents, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1997
• 3: Chen, C. (2004). A Multiagent Approach Using Ontology and Operational Learning to Improve Distributed Information Retrieval, M. S. Thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
• 4: Chen, C. and L.-K., Soh (2004). Adaptive Learning to Optimize Resource Management in a Multiagent Framework, Proc. ICAI'2004 Las Vegas, NV, pp. 386--389.
• 5: McGuinness, D. L. (2002). Conceptual Modeling for Distributed Ontology Environments, Proc. 8th Int. Conf. Conceptual Structures Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues, Darmstadt, Germany, August.
• 6: Tsunenori Mine , Daisuke Matsuno , Koichiro Takaki , Makoto Amamiya, Agent Community Based Peer-to-Peer Information Retrieval, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, p.1484-1485, July 19-23, 2004, New York, New York [doi>10.1109/AAMAS.2004.46]
• 7: Soh, L.-K. (2003). Collaborative Understanding of Distribute Ontologies in a Multiagent Framework: Design and Experiments, Proc. AAMAS 2003 Workshop OAS, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 47--54.
• 8: Soh, L.-K. and C. Tsatsoulis (2001). Reflective Negotiating Agents for Real-Time Multisensor Target Tracking, in Proc. IJCAI'01, August 6--11, Seattle, WA, pp. 1121--1127.
• 9: Takaai, M., H. Takeda, and T. Nishida (1997). Distributed Ontology Development Environment for Multi-Agent Systems, Working Notes AAAI-97 Spring Symp. Series on Ontological Engr., pp. 149--153.
• 10: Andrew B. Williams, Learning to Share Meaning in a Multi-Agent System, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, v.8 n.2, p.165-193, March 2004 [doi>10.1023/B:AGNT.0000011160.45980.4b]
• 11: Haizheng Zhang , W. Bruce Croft , Brian Levine , Victor Lesser, A Multi-Agent Approach for Peer-to-Peer Based Information Retrieval System, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, p.456-463, July 19-23, 2004, New York, New York [doi>10.1109/AAMAS.2004.21]