Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language

ABSTRACT

In this paper we propose an operational method to express the meaning of the messages exchanged among agents that interact in open environments. In an open environment, like for example the Internet, agents are usually designed by different constructors, so it is very important to define the meaning of a standard, widely accepted Agent Communication Language. We express the meaning of messages using the social notion of commitment. Commitments are defined operationally within an object-oriented paradigm. We give an operational specification of the commitment class that includes the concepts of conditional commitment and precommitment. Then we use commitment objects to define the meaning of some interesting speech acts, and give an example of their use in negotiation.

REFERENCES

• 1: J. L. Austin. How to Do Things With Words. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1962
• 2: C. Castelfranchi. Commitments: from individual intentions to groups and organizations. In V. Lesser, editor, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multi--Agent Systems, pages 41--48, San Francisco, CA, 1995
• 3: M. Colombetti. A commitment-based approach to agent speech acts and conversations. In Proc. Workshop on Agent Languages and Communication Policies, 4th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents 2000), Barcelona (E), pages 21--29, 2000
• 4: M. Colombetti. A language for artificial agents. Studies in Communication Sciences, 1(12):1--32, 2001
• 5: Tim Finin , Yanis Labrou , James Mayfield, KQML as an agent communication language, Software agents, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997
• 6: FIPA (2000). Agent Communication Language. FIPA 2000 Specification. Foundation for Intelligent Phisical Agents, http://www.fipa.org, 2000
• 7: Jeremy Pitt , Abe Mamdani, A Protocol-Based Semantics for an Agent Communication Language, Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, p.486-491, July 31-August 06, 1999
• 8: J. R. Searle. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1969
• 9: J. R. Searle. A taxonomy of illocutionary acts. In K. Gunderson, editor, Language, Mind, and Knowledge. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 7, pages 344--369. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1975
• 10: Munindar P. Singh, Agent Communication Languages: Rethinking the Principles, Computer, v.31 n.12, p.40-47, December 1998 [doi>10.1109/2.735849]
• 11: David R. Traum , James F. Allen, Discourse obligations in dialogue processing, Proceedings of the 32nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, p.1-8, June 27-30, 1994, Las Cruces, New Mexico [doi>10.3115/981732.981733]
• 12: Mahadevan Venkatraman , Munindar P. Singh, Verifying Compliance with Commitment Protocols, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, v.2 n.3, p.217-236, September 1999 [doi>10.1023/A:1010056221226]
• 13: Pinar Yolum , Munindar P. Singh, Synthesizing Finite State Machines for Communication Protocols, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, Raleigh, NC, 2001

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
        I.2.11 Distributed Artificial Intelligence
            Subjects: Languages and structures

Additional Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
        I.2.11 Distributed Artificial Intelligence
            Subjects: Multiagent systems

General Terms:
Design, Languages, Standardization, Theory

Keywords:
agent communication language, commitment, conversation protocol, speech act