Objective versus Subjective Coordination in the Engineering of Agent Systems

The governance of interaction is a critical issue in the engineering of agent systems. Research on coordination addresses this issue by providing a wide range of models, abstractions and technologies. It is often the case, however, that such a wide range of proposals could not easily find an unitary and coherent conceptual framework where all the different views and solutions can be understood and compared - and this is particularly true in the context of agent models and systems. In this paper, we first discuss how all the many diverse approaches to agent coordination can be categorised in two main classes - the subjective and objective approaches -, depending on whether they adopt the agent's or the engineer's viewpoint, respectively. We then claim that the two approaches have a deep and different impact on the way in which agent systems are modelled and built, and show two examples rooted in different models and technologies. Finally, we advocate that both approaches play a fundamental role in the engineering of agent systems, and that any methodology for the design and development of agent systems has to exploit both objective and subjective coordination models and technologies.

[1]  Franco Zambonelli,et al.  Agent-Oriented Software Engineering for Internet Applications , 2001, Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies, and Applications.

[2]  Michael Schumacher.  Objective Coordination in Multi-Agent System Engineering: Design and Implementation , 2001 .

[3]  Anthony Scott,et al.  Output, labour and capital in the Canadian economy : February, 1957 , 1957 .

[4]  Michael Luck,et al.  Agent-Oriented Software Engineering V , 2004 .

[5]  Eduardo Alonso Fernández,et al.  Rules of encounter: designing conventions for automated negotiation among computers , 1995 .

[6]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  SODA: Societies and Infrastructures in the Analysis and Design of Agent-Based Systems , 2000, AOSE.

[7]  Peter Wegner,et al.  Why interaction is more powerful than algorithms , 1997, CACM.

[8]  David Gelernter,et al.  Generative communication in Linda , 1985, TOPL.

[9]  Matthias Klusch,et al.  Brokering and Matchmaking for Coordination of Agent Societies: A Survey , 2001, Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies, and Applications.

[10]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The interdisciplinary study of coordination , 1994, CSUR.

[11]  Robert Tolksdorf,et al.  Models of Coordination , 2000, ESAW.

[12]  Franco Zambonelli,et al.  Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies, and Applications , 2014, Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies, and Applications.

[13]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: First International Workshop, AOSE 2000 Limerick, Ireland, June 10, 2000 Revised Papers , 2001 .

[14]  Sascha Ossowski,et al.  Engineering Agent Systems for Decision Support , 2002, ESAW.

[15]  Victor Lesser,et al.  Environment Centered Analysis and Design of Coordination Mechanisms , 1996 .

[16]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Coordination as a Service: Ontological and Formal Foundation , 2003, Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Frank von Martial.  Coordinating Plans of Autonomous Agents , 1992, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[18]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  From tuple spaces to tuple centres , 2001, Sci. Comput. Program..

[19]  Silvana Castano,et al.  Using Patterns to Design Rules in Workflows , 2000, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[20]  Allen Newell,et al.  Reflections on the Knowledge Level , 1993, Artif. Intell..

[21]  Reid G. Smith,et al.  The Contract Net Protocol: High-Level Communication and Control in a Distributed Problem Solver , 1980, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[22]  Alessandro Ricci,et al.  Sustainable Coordination , 2003, AgentLink.

[23]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Virtual Enterprises and Workflow Management As Agent Coordination Issues , 2002, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[24]  Roberto Gorrieri,et al.  Coordination Models: A Guided Tour , 2001, Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies, and Applications.

[25]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Formal ReSpecT , 2001, APPIA-GULP-PRODE.

[26]  José Cuena,et al.  Distributed models for decision support , 1999 .

[27]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Agent-Oriented Software Engineering II , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[28]  W. Thomson.  Chapter 35 Cooperative models of bargaining , 1994 .

[29]  Michael Schumacher,et al.  Objective Coordination in Multi-Agent System Engineering , 2001, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[30]  J. Nash.  THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[31]  Sascha Ossowski,et al.  Co-ordination in Artificial Agent Societies: Social Structures and Its Implications for Autonomous Problem-Solving Agents , 1998 .

[32]  Nicholas R. Jennings,et al.  Intelligent agents: theory and practice , 1995, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[33]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Emergent Properties of a Market-based Digital Library with Strategic Agents , 1998, Proceedings International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (Cat. No.98EX160).

[34]  Sascha Ossowski.  Constraint Based Coordination of Autonomous Agents , 2001, APPIA-GULP-PRODE.

[35]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Coordination Tools for MAS Development and Deployment , 2002, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[36]  Franco Zambonelli,et al.  Coordination of Internet Agents , 2001, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[37]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  Reflections on the Nature of Multi-Agent Coordination and Its Implications for an Agent Architecture , 2004, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.