Towards design tools for protocol development

Interaction protocols enable agents to communicate with each other effectively. Whereas several approaches exist to specify interaction protocols, none of them has design tools that can help protocol designers catch semantical protocol errors at design time. As research in networking protocols has shown, flawed specifications of protocols can have disastrous consequences. Hence, it is crucial to systematically analyze protocols in time to ensure correct specification. This paper studies and formalizes important generic properties of commitment protocols that can ease their correct development significantly. Since these properties are formal, they can easily be incorporated in a software tool to (semi-)automate the design and specification of commitment protocols. Where appropriate we provide algorithms that can directly be used to check these properties in such a design tool.

[1]  Jean-Luc Koning,et al.  Requirement Analysis for Interaction Protocols , 2003, CEEMAS.

[2]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Verifying Compliance with Commitment Protocols Enabling Open Web-Based Multiagent Systems , 1999 .

[3]  Lars-Åke Fredlund,et al.  Book Review: Design and Validation of Computer Protocols by Gerard J. Holzmann (Prentice Hall, 1991) , 1991, CCRV.

[4]  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..

[5]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Flexible protocol specification and execution: applying event calculus planning using commitments , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[6]  Cristiano Castelfranchi,et al.  Commitments: From Individual Intentions to Groups and Organizations , 1995, ICMAS.

[7]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Reasoning about Commitments in the Event Calculus: An Approach for Specifying and Executing Protocols , 2004, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Hans Weigand,et al.  Formal Specification of Interaction in Agent Societies , 2002, FAABS.

[9]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Resolving Commitments among Autonomous Agents , 2003, Workshop on Agent Communication Languages.

[10]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Verifying Compliance with Commitment Protocols , 1998, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[11]  Paola Mello,et al.  Specification and verification of agent interaction protocols in a logic-based system , 2004, SAC '04.

[12]  Mohamed G. Gouda.  Protocol Verification Made Simple: A Tutorial , 1993, Comput. Networks ISDN Syst..

[13]  Marco Colombetti,et al.  Operational specification of a commitment-based agent communication language , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[14]  Munindar P. Singh.  An ontology for commitments in multiagent systems: , 1999, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[15]  Murray Shanahan.  Solving the frame problem - a mathematical investigation of the common sense law of inertia , 1997 .

[16]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Agent-based software engineering , 1997, IEE Proc. Softw. Eng..

[17]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Posit spaces: a performative model of e-commerce , 2003, AAMAS '03.

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

[19]  Alexander Artikis,et al.  Animated specifications of computational societies , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[20]  Martin Peschke,et al.  Design and Validation of Computer Protocols , 2003 .

[21]  Jeffrey D. Smith,et al.  Design and Analysis of Algorithms , 2009, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.