research-article

Conflicting goals in agent-oriented programming

Authors:

Maicon Rafael Zatelli,

Jomi Fred Hübner,

Alessandro Ricci,

Rafael H. BordiniAuthors Info & Claims

AGERE 2016: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Programming Based on Actors, Agents, and Decentralized Control

Pages 21 - 30

https://doi.org/10.1145/3001886.3001889

Published: 30 October 2016 Publication History

Abstract

An important feature of goal-oriented programming languages is that agents are able to easily pursue multiple goals concurrently. However, there is an issue when some concurrent goals may conflict with others. Pursuing conflicting goals concurrently can lead an agent to undesirable behavior, in which case pursuing them concurrently should be avoided. In this paper, we address some such problems ranging from how to specify conflicts among goals to handling conflicts at run-time when they are detected.

References

[1]

N. Alechina, M. Dastani, and B. Logan. Programming norm-aware agents. In AAMAS’12, pages 1057–1064, Richland, SC, 2012. IFAAMAS.

Digital Library

[2]

R. H. Bordini, J. F. Hübner, and M. Wooldridge. Programming multi-agent systems in AgentSpeak using Jason. Wiley, Liverpool, 2007.

Digital Library

[3]

C. Boutilier and R. I. Brafman. Planning with concurrent interacting actions. In AAAI-97, pages 720–726, 1997.

Digital Library

[4]

M. E. Bratman. Intentions, Plans and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1987.

[5]

M. E. Bratman, D. J. Israel, and M. E. Pollack. Plans and resource-bounded practical reasoning. Computational Intelligence, 4:349–355, 1988.

[6]

B. J. Clement and E. H. Durfee. Identifying and resolving conflicts among agents with hierarchical plans. In AAAI Workshop on Negotiation: Settling Conflicts and Identifying Opportunities, AAAI Technical Report WS-99-12, 1999.

[7]

B. J. Clement and E. H. Durfee. Theory for coordinating concurrent hierarchical planning agents using summary information. In AAAI’99, pages 495–502, Menlo Park, CA, USA, 1999.

Digital Library

[8]

R. W. Collier, S. Russell, and D. Lillis. Exploring AOP from an OOP perspective. In AGERE!’15, pages 25–36, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.

Digital Library

[9]

J. S. Cox and E. H. Durfee. Discovering and exploiting synergy between hierarchical planning agents. In AAMAS’03, pages 281–288, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM.

Digital Library

[10]

M. Dastani. 2APL: A practical agent programming language. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 16(3):214–248, June 2008.

Digital Library

[11]

M. Dastani and L. van der Torre. Programming BOIDplan agents deliberating about conflicts among defeasible mental attitudes and plans. In AAMAS’04, pages 706–713, July 2004.

Digital Library

[12]

M. Dastani, M. B. van Riemsdijk, and M. Winikoff. Rich goal types in agent programming. In AAMAS’11, pages 405–412, Richland, SC, 2011. IFAAMAS.

Digital Library

[13]

L. A. Dennis, M. Fisher, M. P. Webster, and R. H. Bordini. Model checking agent programming languages. Automated Software Engg., 19(1):5–63, Mar. 2012.

Digital Library

[14]

R. Evertsz, M. Fletcher, R. Jones, J. Jarvis, J. Brusey, and S. Dance. Implementing industrial multi-agent systems using JACK. In ProMAS’03, pages 18–48. Springer, 2003.

[15]

M. P. Georgeff and A. L. Lansky. Reactive reasoning and planning. In AAAI’87, pages 677–682. AAAI Press, 1987.

Digital Library

[16]

J. Harland, D. N. Morley, J. Thangarajah, and N. Yorke-Smith. Aborting, suspending, and resuming goals and plans in bdi agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, pages 1–44, 2015.

[17]

K. V. Hindriks, F. S. de Boer, W. van der Hoek, and J.-J. C. Meyer. Agent Programming with Declarative Goals, pages 228–243. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2001.

Digital Library

[18]

J. F. Horty and M. E. Pollack. Evaluating new options in the context of existing plans. Artif. Intell., 127(2): 199–220, 2001.

Digital Library

[19]

A. Pokahr, L. Braubach, and W. Lamersdorf. A goal deliberation strategy for BDI agent systems. In MATES’05, pages 82–93, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005.

Digital Library

[20]

Springer.

[21]

A. S. Rao and M. P. George. BDI agents: From theory to practice. In ICMAS’95, pages 312–319, 1995.

[22]

A. Ricci and A. Santi. Programming abstractions for integrating autonomous and reactive behaviors: An agent-oriented approach. In AGERE!’12, pages 83–94, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM.

Digital Library

[23]

M. B. Riemsdijk, M. Dastani, and J.-J. C. Meyer. Goals in conflict: Semantic foundations of goals in agent programming. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 18(3):471–500, June 2009.

Digital Library

[24]

S. Shapiro, S. Sardina, J. Thangarajah, L. Cavedon, and L. Padgham. Revising conflicting intention sets in BDI agents. In AAMAS’12, pages 1081–1088, Richland, SC, 2012. IFAAMAS.

Digital Library

[25]

T. Sugawara, S. Kurihara, T. Hirotsu, K. Fukuda, and T. Takada. Predicting possible conflicts in hierarchical planning for multi-agent systems. In AAMAS’05, pages 813–820, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM.

Digital Library

[26]

J. Thangarajah and L. Padgham. Computationally effective reasoning about goal interactions. J. Autom. Reason., 47(1):17–56, June 2011.

Digital Library

[27]

J. Thangarajah, L. Padgham, and J. Harland. Representation and reasoning for goals in BDI agents. Aust. Comput. Sci. Commun., 24(1):259–265, Jan. 2002.

Digital Library

[28]

J. Thangarajah, M. Winikoff, L. Padgham, and K. Fischer. Avoiding resource conflicts in intelligent agents. In ECAI’02, pages 18–22. IOS Press, 2002.

Digital Library

[29]

J. Thangarajah, L. Padgham, and M. Winikoff. Detecting & exploiting positive goal interaction in intelligent agents. In AAMAS’03, pages 401–408, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM.

Digital Library

[30]

J. Thangarajah, L. Padgham, and M. Winikoff. Detecting & avoiding interference between goals in intelligent agents. In IJCAI’03, pages 721–726. Morgan Kaufmann, 2003.

Digital Library

[31]

K. Vikhorev, N. Alechina, R. H. Bordini, and B. Logan. An operational semantics for AgentSpeak(RT) (preliminary report). In DALT’11, Taipei, Taiwan, 2011.

[32]

X. Wang, J. Cao, and J. Wang. A runtime goal conflict resolution model for agent systems. In WI-IAT’12, volume 2, pages 340–347, Dec 2012.

Digital Library

[33]

D. Wieczorek and S. Albayrak. Open scalable agent architecture for telecommunication applications. In IATA’98, pages 233–249. Springer, 1998.

Digital Library

Cited By

Saadi AMaamri RSahnoun Z(2020)Behavioral flexibility in Belief-Desire- Intention (BDI) architecturesMultiagent and Grid Systems10.3233/MGS-20033516:4(343-377)Online publication date: 31-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.3233/MGS-200335
Morveli-Espinoza MTacla CJasinski H(2020)An Argumentation-Based Approach for Explaining Goals Selection in Intelligent AgentsIntelligent Systems10.1007/978-3-030-61380-8_4(47-62)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61380-8_4
Telang PSingh MYorke-Smith N(2019)A coupled operational semantics for goals and commitmentsJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research10.1613/jair.1.1149465:1(31-85)Online publication date: 1-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1613/jair.1.11494
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Conflicting goals in agent-oriented programming
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Distributed artificial intelligence

Recommendations

Agent programming in dribble: from beliefs to goals using plans
AAMAS '03: Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems

To support the practical development of intelligent agents, several programming languages have been introduced that incorporate concepts from agent logics: on the one hand, we have languages that incorporate beliefs and plans (i.e., procedural goals), ...
Goals in agent systems: a unifying framework
AAMAS '08: Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems - Volume 2

In the literature on agent systems, the proactive behavior of agents is often modeled in terms of goals that the agents pursue. We review a number of commonly-used existing goal types and propose a simple and general definition of goal, which unifies ...
Rich goal types in agent programming
AAMAS '11: The 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 1

Goals are central to the design and implementation of intelligent software agents. Much of the literature on goals and reasoning about goals in agent programming frameworks only deals with a limited set of goal types, typically achievement goals, and ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

AGERE 2016: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Programming Based on Actors, Agents, and Decentralized Control

October 2016

69 pages

ISBN:9781450346399

DOI:10.1145/3001886

Copyright © 2016 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

SIGPLAN: ACM Special Interest Group on Programming Languages

In-Cooperation

SIGAda: ACM Special Interest Group on Ada Programming Language

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 30 October 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Conference

SPLASH '16

Sponsor:

SIGPLAN

SPLASH '16: Conference on Systems, Programming, Languages, and Applications: Software for Humanity

October 30, 2016

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 19 of 35 submissions, 54%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

7
Total Citations
View Citations
151
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)5
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 03 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Saadi AMaamri RSahnoun Z(2020)Behavioral flexibility in Belief-Desire- Intention (BDI) architecturesMultiagent and Grid Systems10.3233/MGS-20033516:4(343-377)Online publication date: 31-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.3233/MGS-200335
Morveli-Espinoza MTacla CJasinski H(2020)An Argumentation-Based Approach for Explaining Goals Selection in Intelligent AgentsIntelligent Systems10.1007/978-3-030-61380-8_4(47-62)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61380-8_4
Telang PSingh MYorke-Smith N(2019)A coupled operational semantics for goals and commitmentsJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research10.1613/jair.1.1149465:1(31-85)Online publication date: 1-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1613/jair.1.11494
Fernández Díaz ÁBenac Earle CFredlund L(2019)Pitfalls of Jason ConcurrencyEngineering Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/978-3-030-25693-7_2(19-33)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25693-7_2
Lippi MMamei MMariani SZambonelli F(2019)Distributed Speaking Objects: A Case for Massive Multiagent SystemsMassively Multi-Agent Systems II10.1007/978-3-030-20937-7_1(3-20)Online publication date: 19-May-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20937-7_1
Lippi MMamei MMariani SZambonelli F(2017)Coordinating Distributed Speaking Objects2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)10.1109/ICDCS.2017.282(1949-1960)Online publication date: Jun-2017
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDCS.2017.282
Espinoza MPossebom ATacla C(2017)Resolving Resource Incompatibilities in Intelligent Agents2017 Brazilian Conference on Intelligent Systems (BRACIS)10.1109/BRACIS.2017.28(127-132)Online publication date: Oct-2017
https://doi.org/10.1109/BRACIS.2017.28

View Options

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.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten