Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCranefield, Stephenen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorWinikoff, Michaelen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorVasconcelos, Wambertoen_NZ
dc.date.available2011-04-07T03:05:04Z
dc.date.copyright2011-02en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationCranefield, S., Winikoff, M., & Vasconcelos, W. (2011). Modelling and monitoring interdependent expectations (Information Science Discussion Papers Series No. 2011/04). University of Otago. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10523/825en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/825
dc.description.abstractPrevious research on modelling and monitoring norms, contracts and commitments has studied the semantics of concepts such as obligation, permission, prohibition and commitment; languages for expressing behavioural constraints (such as norms or contracts) to be followed by agents in specific contexts; and mechanisms for run-time monitoring of fulfilment and violation of these constraints. However, there has been little work that provided all of these features while also allowing the current expectations of agents, and the fulfilment and violation of these expectations to be expressed as first-class constructs in the language. This paper demonstrates the benefits of providing this capability by considering a variety of use cases and demonstrating how these can be addressed as applications of a previously defined temporal logic of expectations and an associated monitoring technique.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherUniversity of Otagoen_NZ
dc.relation.ispartofseriesInformation Science Discussion Papers Seriesen_NZ
dc.subject.lcshQA76 Computer softwareen_NZ
dc.titleModelling and monitoring interdependent expectationsen_NZ
dc.typeDiscussion Paperen_NZ
dc.description.versionUnpublisheden_NZ
otago.bitstream.pages17en_NZ
otago.date.accession2011-02-09 06:31:15en_NZ
otago.schoolInformation Scienceen_NZ
otago.openaccessOpen
otago.place.publicationDunedin, New Zealanden_NZ
dc.identifier.eprints1094en_NZ
otago.school.eprintsSoftware Engineering & Collaborative Modelling Laboratoryen_NZ
otago.school.eprintsInformation Scienceen_NZ
dc.description.references1. Alberti, M., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Compliance verification of agent interaction: a logic-based software tool. Applied Artificial Intelligence 20(2), 133–157 (2006) 2. Aldewereld, H., Álvarez-Napagao, S., Dignum, F., Vázquez-Salceda, J.: Making norms concrete. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. pp. 807–814. IFAAMAS (2010) 3. Artikis, A., Sergot, M.: Executable specification of open multi-agent systems.LogicJournal of the IGPL 18(1), 31–65 (2009) 4. Bacchus, F., Kabanza, F.: Using temporal logics to express search control knowledge for planning. Artificial Intelligence 116(1-2), 123–191 (2000) 5. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., Chaib-draa, B.: Commitment and argument network: a new formalism for agent communication. In: Dignum, F. (ed.) Advances in Agent Communication, LNCS, vol. 2922, pp. 146–165. Springer (2004) 6. Bentahar, J., Moulin, B., Meyer, J.J.C., Lespérance, Y.: A new logical semantics for agent communication. In: Inoue, K., Satoh, K., Toni, F. (eds.) Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems, LNCS, vol. 4371, pp. 151–170. Springer (2007) 7. Blackburn, P., deRijke, M., Venema, Y.: Modal Logic. Cambridge University Press(2001) 8. Boella, G., Torre, L., Verhagen, H.: Introduction to the special issue on normative multiagent systems. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 17(1), 1–10 (2008) 9. Broersen, J., Dignum, F., Dignum, V., , Meyer, J.J.C.: Designing a deontic logic of deadlines. In: Deontic Logic in Computer Science, LNAI, vol. 3065. Springer (2004) 10. Cranefield, S., Winikoff, M.: Verifying social expectations by model checking truncated paths. Journal of Logic and Computation (2010), advance access, doi: 10.1093/log-com/exq055 11. Dignum, F., Meyer, J.J.C., Wieringa, R.: A dynamic logic for reasoning about sub-ideal states. In: ECAI Workshop on Artificial Normative Reasoning. pp. 79–92 (1994) 12. Dignum, F., Weigand, H., Verharen, E.: Meeting the deadline: On the formal specification of temporal deontic constraints. In: Foundations of Intelligent Systems, LNAI, vol. 1079, pp. 243–252. Springer (1996) 13. Eisner, C., Fisman, D., Havlicek, J., Lustig, Y., McIsaac, A., Campenhout, D.V.: Reasoning with temporal logic on truncated paths. In: Computer Aided Verification, LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 27–39. Springer (2003) 14. Esteva, M., Rosell, B., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A., Arcos, J.L.: AMELI: An agent-based middleware for electronic institutions. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. vol. 1, pp. 236–243. IEEE Computer Society (2004) 15. Farrell, A.D.H., Sergot, M.J., Sallé, M., Bartolini, C.: Using the event calculus for tracking the normative state of contracts. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 14(2 & 3), 99–129 (2005) 16. Fornara, N., Vigano`, F., Colombetti, M.: Agent communication and artificial institutions. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 14(2), 121–142 (2007) 17. Gabbay, D.M.: The declarative past and imperative future: Executable temporal logic for interactive systems. In: Temporal Logic in Specification, LNCS, vol. 398, pp. 409–448. Springer (1989) 18. García-Camino, A., Noriega, P., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A.: Implementing norms in electronic institutions. In: Proceedings of the 4nd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2005). pp. 667–673. ACM Press (2005) 19. García-Camino, A., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A., Sierra, C., Vasconcelos, W.W.: Constraint rule-based programming of norms for electronic institutions. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 18(1), 186–217 (2009) 20. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: How do agents comply with norms? Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 09121, http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2009/1909 (2009) 21. Modgil, S., Faci, N., Meneguzzi, F., Oren, N., Miles, S., Luck, M.: A framework for monitoring agent-based normative systems. In: Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. pp. 153–160. IFAAMAS, Richland, SC (2009) 22. Singh, M.P.: Semantical considerations on dialectical and practical commitments. In: Cohn, A. (ed.) Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. vol. 1, pp. 176–181. AAAI Press (2008) 23. Spoletini, P., Verdicchio, M.: An automata-based monitoring technique for commitment-based multi-agent systems. In: Coordination, Organizations, Institutions and Norms in Agent Systems IV, LNAI, vol. 5428, pp. 172–187. Springer (2009) 24. Vázquez-Salceda, J.: The role of norms and electronic institutions in multi-agent systems applied to complex domains: The harmonia framework. AI Communications 16(3), 209–212 (2003) 25. Vázquez-Salceda, J., Aldewereld, H., Dignum, F.: Implementing norms in multiagent systems. In: Multiagent System Technologies, LNCS, vol. 3187, pp. 313–327. Springer (2004) 26. Verdicchio, M., Colombetti, M.: Communication languages for multiagent systems.Computational Intelligence 25(2), 136–159 (2009) 27. Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Commitment machines. In: Meyer, J.J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) Intelligent Agents VIII, LNCS, vol. 2333, pp. 235–247. Springer (2002)en_NZ
otago.relation.number2011/04en_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record