A synthesis between mental attitudes and social commitments in agent communication languages

There are two main traditions in defining a semantics for agent communication languages, based either on mental attitudes or on social commitments. In this paper we show how the role metaphor can be used to bridge the gap between these two approaches. First, we show how dialogues can be modelled as games & a form of normative systems & and how mental attitudes can be attributed not only to agents, but also, in a public manner, to the roles of the game. The dialogue moves allow an agent playing a role to modify the roles' mental states, as specified by the counts as conditionals (also known as constitutive norms) defining the game. The player of a role is expected to act as if it has the mental attitudes attributed to its role during the dialogue and to prevent its role's mental attitudes from becoming incoherent, as it does for its own private mental attitudes. Secondly, we show how roles as descriptions of expected behavior maintain the normative character of social semantics. Due to the bridge between the two approaches, results and tools from one approach can be used in the other one.

[1]  Edgar A. Whitley,et al.  The Construction of Social Reality , 1999 .

[2]  Simon Parsons,et al.  An argumentation-based Semantics for Agent Communication Languages , 2002, ECAI.

[3]  Robert Brandom,et al.  Making it explicit : reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment , 1996 .

[4]  Mehdi Dastani,et al.  Goal generation in the BOID architecture , 2002 .

[5]  Brahim Chaib-draa,et al.  The cognitive coherence approach for agent communication pragmatics , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[6]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  Protocol Conformance for Logic-based Agents , 2003, IJCAI.

[7]  Guido Boella,et al.  Regulative and Constitutive Norms in Normative Multiagent Systems , 2004, KR.

[8]  Sebastian Rödl Robert B. Brandom, Making It Explicit. Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment , 1999 .

[9]  John R. Searle,et al.  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language , 1970 .

[10]  Barbara Dunin-Keplicz,et al.  Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology , 2005 .

[11]  Leon van der Torre,et al.  Input/Output Logics , 2000, J. Philos. Log..

[12]  D. Walton,et al.  Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning , 1995 .

[13]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Semantic Issues in the Verification of Agent Communication Languages , 2000, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[14]  Munindar P. Singh A Social Semantics for Agent Communication Languages , 2000, Issues in Agent Communication.

[15]  Farhad Arbab,et al.  Abstract Behavior Types: a foundation model for components and their composition , 2002, Sci. Comput. Program..

[16]  G. Boella The Ontological Properties of Social Roles : Definitional Dependence , Powers and Roles Playing Roles , 2005 .

[17]  C. Raymond Perrault,et al.  Elements of a Plan-Based Theory of Speech Acts , 1979, Cogn. Sci..

[18]  Marco Colombetti,et al.  A logical model of social commitment for agent communication , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[19]  A. Koller,et al.  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language , 1969 .

[20]  Guido Boella,et al.  Organizations as Socially Constructed Agents in the Agent Oriented Paradigm , 2004, ESAW.

[21]  Brahim Chaib-draa,et al.  A logical model for commitment and argument network for agent communication , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..