The cognitive coherence approach for agent communication pragmatics

Different approaches have investigated the syntax and semantic of agent communication. However, all these approaches (including : agent communication languages, conversation policies and dialogue games) have not indicated how agents should dynamically use communications. In fact, most of these approaches have mainly focused on "structure" of dialogues even though developers are more interested in agents' capabilities of having "useful" conversations in respect to their goals rather than in their abilities to structure dialogues. This leads us to propose a theory of use of conversations between agents. This pragmatic theory extends and adapts the cognitive dissonance theory (a major theory of social psychology) to multi-agent systems. In this paper, we show how this theory allows us to provide generic conceptual tools for the automation of both agent communicational behavior and attitude change processes. The cognitive coherence that we propose is formulated in terms of constraints and elements of cognition and allows us to define cognitive incoherences and dialogue utility measures. We show how these measures could be used to solve common problems and answer some critical questions concerning agent communication frameworks use. Finally, the theory is illustrated with an example of dialogue games automatic use.

[1]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Specification of the KQML Agent-Communication Language , 1993 .

[2]  Paul Thagard,et al.  Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction , 2019, Cogn. Sci..

[3]  J. Brehm,et al.  Explorations in Cognitive Dissonance , 1962 .

[4]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  An Analysis of Cooperation and Conflict in Students’ Collaborative Explanations for Phenomena in Mechanics , 1992 .

[5]  Michael E. Bratman,et al.  What is intention , 1987 .

[6]  Roberto A. Flores,et al.  Bringing Coherence to Agent Conversations , 2001, AOSE.

[7]  E. Harmon-Jones,et al.  Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. , 1999 .

[8]  John Bellamy Foster,et al.  Freedom and determination in history according to Marx and Engels , 1992 .

[9]  Munindar P. Singh Agent Communication Languages: Rethinking the Principles , 2003, Communication in Multiagent Systems.

[10]  L. Festinger,et al.  A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance , 2017 .

[11]  Chris Reed,et al.  Dialogue frames in agent communication , 1998, Proceedings International Conference on Multi Agent Systems (Cat. No.98EX160).

[12]  Mehdi Dastani,et al.  Negotiation protocols and dialogue games , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[13]  D. Walton,et al.  Commitment In Dialogue , 1995 .

[14]  D. Ewoldsen,et al.  Cognitive Dissonance , 2020, The International Encyclopedia of Media Psychology.

[15]  Marco Colombetti,et al.  Commitment-based semantics for Agent Communication Languages , 2000 .

[16]  Brahim Chaib-draa,et al.  Request for Action Reconsidered as a Dialogue Game Based on Commitments , 2003, Communication in Multiagent Systems.

[17]  R. A. Wicklund,et al.  Perspectives on cognitive dissonance , 1976 .

[18]  Bernard Moulin,et al.  The Social Dimension of Interactions in Multiagent Systems , 1997, Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Formalisms, Methodologies, and Applications.

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

[20]  Antinus Nijholt,et al.  Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue , 1998 .

[21]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[22]  Stephen W. Littlejohn Theories of Human Communication , 1978 .

[23]  O. Oha Fallacies , 2005 .

[24]  Frank Dignum,et al.  Issues in Agent Communication: An Introduction , 2000, Issues in Agent Communication.

[25]  Nicolas Maudet Modéliser les conventions des interactions langagières : la contribution des jeux de dialogue , 2001 .

[26]  Jean-Louis Dessalles,et al.  The Interplay of Desire and Necessity in Dialogue , 1998 .

[27]  Joseph Bates,et al.  The role of emotion in believable agents , 1994, CACM.