Article

Detecting & exploiting positive goal interaction in intelligent agents

Authors:

John Thangarajah,

Michael WinikoffAuthors Info & Claims

AAMAS '03: Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems

Pages 401 - 408

https://doi.org/10.1145/860575.860640

Published: 14 July 2003 Publication History

Abstract

Rational agents typically pursue multiple goals in parallel. However most existing agent systems do not have any infrastructure support for reasoning about either positive or negative interactions between goals. Negative interactions include such things as competition for resources, which if unrecognised can lead to unnecessary failure of both goals requiring the resource. Positive interactions include situations where there is potentially a common subgoal of two goals. This paper looks at mechanisms for identifying potential common subgoals, and attempting to schedule the actions of the agent to take advantage of this. Potential common subgoals are identified by maintaining summaries of definite and potential effects of goals and plans to achieve those goals. Template summaries for goal types are produced at compile time, while instance summaries are maintained and updated at execution time to allow the agent to choose and schedule its plans to take advantage of potential commonality where possible. This increases the ability of the agent to act in a rational manner, where rational is loosely defined as the sensible behaviour exhibited by humans.

References

[1]

P. Busetta, R. Rönnquist, A. Hodgson, and A. Lucas. JACK Intelligent Agents - Components for Intelligent Agents in Java. Technical report, Agent Oriented Software Pty. Ltd, Melbourne, Australia, 1998.

[2]

B. J. Clement and E. H. Durfee. Theory for coordinating concurrent hierarchical planning agents using summary information. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-99), pages 495--502, July 1999.

Digital Library

[3]

B. J. Clement and E. H. Durfee. Top-down search for coordinating the hierarchical plans or multiple agents. In O. Etzioni, J. P. M"uller, and J. M. Bradshaw, editors, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'99), pages 252--259, Seattle, WA, USA, 1999. ACM Press.

Digital Library

[4]

M. d'Inverno, D. Kinny, M. Luck, and M. Wooldridge. A formal specification of dMARS. In M. Singh, A. Rao, and M. Wooldridge, editors, Intelligent Agents IV: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, pages 155--176. Springer-Verlag LNAI 1365, 1998.

Digital Library

[5]

D. E. Foulser, M. Li, and Q. Yang. Theory and algorithms for plan merging. Artificial Intelligence, 57(2-3):143--181, 1992.

Digital Library

[6]

A. N. Habermann. Prevention of system deadlocks. Communications of the ACM, 12(7):373--377, 1969.

Digital Library

[7]

J. F. Horty and M. E. Pollack. Evaluating new options in the context of existing plans. In Artificial Intelligence, volume 127, pages 199--220. 2001.

Digital Library

[8]

M. J. Huber. JAM: A BDI-theoretic mobile agent architecture. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'99), pages 236--243, May 1999.

Digital Library

[9]

F. F. Ingrand, M. P. Georgeff, and A. S. Rao. An architecture for real-time reasoning and system control. IEEE Expert, 7(6), 1992.

Digital Library

[10]

D. S. Nau, Q. Yang, and J. Hendler. Optimization of multiple-goal plans with limited interaction. In Proc. of the Workshop on Innovative Approaches to Planning, pages 160--165, Scheduling and Control, San Diego, CA, 1990.

[11]

R. Obermarck. Distributed deadlock detection algorithm. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 7(2):187--208, 1982.

Digital Library

[12]

M. E. Pollack. Overloading intentions for efficient practical reasoning. Noûs, 25(4):513--536, 1991.

[13]

A. S. Rao and M. P. Georgeff. An abstract architecture for rational agents. In C. Rich, W. Swartout, and B. Nebel, editors, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pages 439--449, San Mateo, CA, 1992. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

[14]

J. Thangarajah, L. Padgham, and J. Harland. Representation and reasoning for goals in BDI agents. In M. Oudshoorn, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Australasian Computer Science Conference (ACSC 2002), Melbourne, Australia, 2002.

Digital Library

[15]

J. Thangarajah, M. Winikoff, L. Padgham, and K. Fischer. Avoiding resource conflicts in intelligent agents. In van Harmelen, editor, Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Artifical Intelligence 2002 (ECAI 2002), Lyon, France, 2002.

[16]

M. Winikoff, L. Padgham, J. Harland, and J. Thangarajah. Declarative & procedural goals in intelligent agent systems. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2002), Toulouse, France, Apr. 2002.

Digital Library

Cited By

Rodriguez SThangarajah JDastani MSichman JAlechina NDignum V(2024)Explainable Agents (XAg) by DesignProceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3635637.3663263(2712-2716)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3635637.3663263
Rodriguez SThangarajah JDavey ADastani MSichman JAlechina NDignum V(2024)Design Patterns for Explainable Agents (XAg)Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3635637.3663023(1621-1629)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3635637.3663023
Mahala GGhose ADam HConsoli A(2024)Verifying Multi -Agent Coordination Correctness for BDI Agents2024 IEEE 48th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC)10.1109/COMPSAC61105.2024.00013(21-26)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC61105.2024.00013
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Detecting & exploiting positive goal interaction in intelligent agents
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Distributed artificial intelligence
      1. Intelligent agents
    2. Planning and scheduling

Recommendations

Computationally Effective Reasoning About Goal Interactions

It is important that intelligent agents are able to pursue multiple goals in parallel, in a rational manner. In this work we have described the careful empirical evaluation of the value of data structures and algorithms developed for reasoning about ...
Goal Selection Strategies for Rational Agents
Languages, Methodologies and Development Tools for Multi-Agent Systems

In agent theory and agent programming, goals constitute the motivational attitude of rational agents and form the key concept in explaining and generating their pro-active behavior. Pursuing multiple goals simultaneously might pose problems for agents ...
Rational interaction: cooperation among intelligent agents

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

AAMAS '03: Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems

July 2003

1200 pages

ISBN:1581136838

DOI:10.1145/860575

General Chairs:
Jeffrey S. Rosenschein
Israel
,
Michael Wooldridge
UK
,
Program Chairs:
Tuomas Sandholm
USA
,
Makoto Yokoo
Japan

Copyright © 2003 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 14 July 2003

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Conference

AAMAS03

Sponsor:

AAMAS03: Second International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

July 14 - 18, 2003

Melbourne, Australia

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

54
Total Citations
View Citations
867
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)8
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 15 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Rodriguez SThangarajah JDastani MSichman JAlechina NDignum V(2024)Explainable Agents (XAg) by DesignProceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3635637.3663263(2712-2716)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3635637.3663263
Rodriguez SThangarajah JDavey ADastani MSichman JAlechina NDignum V(2024)Design Patterns for Explainable Agents (XAg)Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3635637.3663023(1621-1629)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3635637.3663023
Mahala GGhose ADam HConsoli A(2024)Verifying Multi -Agent Coordination Correctness for BDI Agents2024 IEEE 48th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC)10.1109/COMPSAC61105.2024.00013(21-26)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC61105.2024.00013
Song CYao YChan S(2024)Incorporating Online Learning Into MCTS-Based Intention ProgressionIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.339079612(56400-56413)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3390796
Harman HSimoens P(2024)Cyclic Action Graphs for goal recognition problems with inaccurately initialised fluentsKnowledge and Information Systems10.1007/s10115-023-01976-666:2(1257-1300)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10115-023-01976-6
Wu DYao YAlechina NLogan BThangarajah JAgmon NAn BRicci AYeoh W(2023)Intention Progression with Maintenance GoalsProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3545946.3598947(2400-2402)Online publication date: 30-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3545946.3598947
Dann MThangarajah JLi MAgmon NAn BRicci AYeoh W(2023)Feedback-Guided Intention Scheduling for BDI AgentsProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3545946.3598760(1173-1181)Online publication date: 30-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3545946.3598760
Winikoff MSidorenko GDignum VDignum F(2021)Why bad coffee? Explaining BDI agent behaviour with valuingsArtificial Intelligence10.1016/j.artint.2021.103554(103554)Online publication date: Jul-2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2021.103554
Daun MBrings JKrajinski LStenkova VBandyszak T(2021)A GRL-compliant iStar extension for collaborative cyber-physical systemsRequirements Engineering10.1007/s00766-021-00347-3Online publication date: 4-Feb-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-021-00347-3
Tielman MJonker Cvan Riemsdijk MElkind EVeloso MAgmon NTaylor M(2019)Deriving Norms from Actions, Values and ContextProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3306127.3332065(2223-2225)Online publication date: 8-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3306127.3332065
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents