Multi-Agent-Based Simulation III

Today’s application tend to be more and more decentralised, pervasive, made of autonomous entities or agents, and have to run in dynamic environments. Applications tend to be social in the sense that they enter into communication as human people, and engage into discovery, negotiation, and transactions processes; autonomous programs run their own process, interact with other programs when necessary, but each program lives its life, and a global behaviour emerges from their interactions, similarly to what can be observed in natural life (physical, biological or social systems). Tomorrow’s applications are more and more driven by social interactions, autonomy, and emergence, therefore tomorrow’s engineering methods have to take into account these new dimensions. Traditional software engineering will not be adapted to this new kind of applications: they do not scale, they do not enable the definition of local behaviours and drawing of conclusions about global behaviours. The scope of this paper is to determine today’s and tomorrow’s application domains, where such a sociological behaviour can be observed. Starting from the observation of natural life (natural mechanisms used for self-organisation, for anonymous communication, etc), we then discuss how these natural mechanisms can be translated (or have an artificial counterpart) into electronic applications. We also consider software engineering issues, and discuss some preliminary solutions to the engineering of emergent behaviour.

[1]  Yves Demazeau,et al.  A Social Reasoning Mechanism Based On Dependence Networks , 1997, ECAI.

[2]  Tim Menzies Knowledge Elicitation: the State of the Art , 2000 .

[3]  J. A. Trimble Structuring knowledge acquisition in software development projects , 2000, South Afr. Comput. J..

[4]  Susan S. Kirschenbaum,et al.  Running Head : Analyzing A Novel Expertise Analyzing a Novel Expertise : An Unmarked Road , 1999 .

[5]  Nuno David,et al.  Agent-Based Social Simulation with Coalitions in Social Reasoning , 2000, MABS.

[6]  Colin Eden,et al.  Strategic thinking with computers , 1990 .

[7]  François Bousquet,et al.  Role-playing games for opening the black box of multi-agent systems: method and lessons of its application to Senegal River Valley irrigated systems , 2001, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[8]  Andrea Prat,et al.  Inefficient equilibria in lobbying , 2001 .

[9]  François Bousquet,et al.  SHADOC: a multi‐agent model to tackle viability of irrigated systems , 2000, Annals of Operations Research.

[10]  Sociological Studies , 1934, Nature.

[11]  Rafael H. Bordini,et al.  A system of exchange values to support social interactions in artificial societies , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[12]  D. E. Matthews Evolution and the Theory of Games , 1977 .

[13]  Helder Coelho,et al.  Improving Choice Mechanisms within the BVG Architecture , 2000, ATAL.

[14]  L. Suchman Plans and situated actions , 1987 .

[15]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Decision-Theoretic Planning: Structural Assumptions and Computational Leverage , 1999, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[16]  Olivier Barreteau,et al.  Multi-agent systems and role games : collective learning processes for ecosystem management , 2002 .

[17]  Seth Bullock,et al.  Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart , 1999 .

[18]  Bob J. Wielinga,et al.  KADS: a modelling approach to knowledge engineering , 1992 .

[19]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Special Section: Contending with Complexity: Developing and Using a Scaled World in Applied Cognitive Research , 2000, Hum. Factors.

[20]  C. Mullon,et al.  An environmental modelling approach : the use of multi-agent simulations , 1988 .

[21]  Kenneth D. Forbus Qualitative Process Theory , 1984, Artificial Intelligence.

[22]  R. Conte,et al.  Cognitive and social action , 1995 .

[23]  Cristiano Castelfranchi,et al.  A cognitive approach to values , 1989 .

[24]  Tim Menzies,et al.  Assessing Responses to Situated CognitionTim MenziesDept , 1996 .

[25]  Karen L. McGraw,et al.  Knowledge Acquisition: Principles and Guidelines , 1989 .

[26]  G. Homans,et al.  Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. , 1961 .

[27]  Liz Sonenberg,et al.  On social commitment, roles and preferred goals , 1998, Proceedings International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (Cat. No.98EX160).

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

[29]  Nigel Shadbolt,et al.  Towards a knowledge technology for knowledge management , 1999, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[30]  J. Gero,et al.  DESIGN AND CHANGE: A MODEL OF SITUATED CREATIVITY , 2003, IJCAI 2003.