FORMALIZATION OFCAPABILITY FORCOMMAND-BASEDAGENT

behavior atpresent mostly focus ontheintention and Intentional agent systems areincreasingly usedina desire ofagent, butthecapability ofagent, whichis widerangeofcomplex applications. Capability has necessary torealize itsgoal, isnotbeconsidered recently beenintroduced into someofthese systems asa sufficiently [3][4]. Forexample, awarship perform a software engineering mechanism tosupport modularitymission toanti-submarine (its goal), butifithasno andreusability while still allowing meta-level reasoning. proper equipments (capability), thenevenithassuch Depending oncircumstances, capability maynotalways intention anddesire, thegoalalso cannotbeachieved. result inanachievable plan forrealizing thegoal, butit So,thecapability isnecessary torealize thegoal. isaprerequisite forsuch. Based onBDIlogic, this paper Depending oncircumstances, capability maynotalways presents aBGCmodel, whichincludes amental state of result inanachievable planforrealizing thegoal, butit commandUnder BGCframe, thenotion ofcapability is isaprerequisite forsuch[5]. discussed andformalized, alsotheaxiomsystem and BasedontheBDIlogic, anewmental logic BGC compatibility ofcapability isinvestigated. Farther more, (Belief-Goal-Command), whichisanswerforthe a style ofagent commitment isdefined asself-aware military commandmechanism, ispresented inthepaper; agent, whichallows anagent tomodify itsgoals and theconcept ofcapability andhowitcanbeintegrated commands asitscapabilities change. Practice shows into BGClogic isalso discussed. Sowecanpreserve the BGClogic andcapability theory cansolve thedynamic features ofthelogic while adding toitthecapability to selection between rolesandagents, andmeetthe meetthedemandofCMAS. demandsofcommand-based MAS application on obedience andflexibility properly. 2.BGC LOGIC OF AGENT