Beliefs, obligations, intentions, and desires as components in an agent architecture

International Journal of Intelligent Systems

Volumn 20, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 893-919

  Broersen, Jan ^a   Dastani, Mehdi ^a   Van Der Torre, Leendert ^b,c  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b CWI   (Netherlands)

^c DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTONOMOUS AGENTS; COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; CONSTRAINT THEORY; FORMAL LOGIC; FUNCTIONS; SPECIFICATIONS;

COGNITIVE ATTITUDES; COORDINATION LEVELS; INPUT/OUTPUT LOGICS; OBLIGATIONS;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS;

EID: 27644496466     PISSN: 08848173     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/int.20098     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Brazier FMT, Jonker CM, Treur J. Principles of compositional multi-agent system development. In: Cuena J, editor. Proc 15th IFIP World Computer Congress, WCC'98, Conference on Information Technology and Knowledge Systems, IT&KNOWS'98. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1998. pp 347-360.
2. Treur J. Semantic formalisation of interactive reasoning functionality. Int J Intell Syst 2002;17:645-686.
3. Makinson D, van der Torre L. Input-output logics. J Philos Logic 2000;29:383-408.
4. Makinson D, van der Torre L. Constraints for input-output logics. J Philos Logic 2001;30:155-185.
5. Bratman ME. Intention, plans, and practical reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1987.
6. Thomason R. Desires and defaults. In: Proc Seventh Int Conf on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'2000). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2000. pp 702-713.
7. Broersen J, Dastani M, van der Torre L. Realistic desires. J Appl Non-Class Logic 2002;12:287-308.
8. Castelfranchi C, Dignum F, Jonker C, Treur J. Deliberative normative agents: Principles and architecture. In: Proc Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1999. pp 364-378.
9. Broersen J, Dastani M, Hulstijn J, van der Torre L. Goal generation in the BOID architecture. Cognit Sci Q 2002;2:428-447.
10. Eiter T, Subrahmanian VS, Pick G. Heterogeneous active agents I: Semantics. Artif Intell 1999;108:179-255.
11. Cohen PR, Levesque HJ. Intention is choice with commitment. Artif Intell 1990;42:213-261.
12. Rao A, Georgeff M. Modeling rational agents within a BDI architecture. In: Proc Int Conf on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'91). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann; 1991. pp 473-484.
13. Dastani M, van der Torre L. What is a normative goal? Towards goal-based normative agent architectures. In: Regulated Agent-Based Systems. Postproceedings International Workshop on Regulated Agent-Based Social Systems: Theories and Applications (RASTA02), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 2934, Berlin: Springer; 2004. pp 210-227.
14. Alchourrón CE, Gärdenfors P, Makinson D. On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. J Symbolic Logic 1985;50:510-530.
15. Arbab F. Abstract behavior types: A foundation model for components and their composition. In: Formal Methods for Components and Objects: First International Symposium, FMCO 2002, Leiden, The Netherlands, November 5-8, 2002, Revised Lectures. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2852. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2003. pp 33-70.
16. The BOID's home page. http://boid.info.
17. Leemans P, Treur J, Willems M. On the verification of knowledge-based reasoning modules. Technical Report IR-346, Vrije universiteit, faculteit der wiskunde en informatica; 1993.
18. Reiter R. A logic for default reasoning. Artif Intell 1980;13:81-132.
19. Lewis D. Counterfactuals. Oxford, UK: Blackwell; 1973.
20. Kraus S, Lehmann D, Magidor M. Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artif Intell 1990;44:167-207.
21. Georgeff M, Lansky A. Reactive reasoning and planning. In: Proc Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-87). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press; 1987. pp 677-682.
22. Rao A, Georgeff M. An abstract architecture for rational agents. In: Proc Int Conf on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'92). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann; 1992. pp 439-449.
23. Rao A, Georgeff M. BDI agents: From theory to practice. In: Proc First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS'95). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press; 1995. pp 312-319.
24. Schild K. On the relationship between BDI logics and standard logics of concurrency. Autonom Agent Multi Agent Syst 2000;3:259-283.
25. van der Torre L, Tan Y. Contrary-to-duty reasoning with preference-based dyadic obligations. Ann Math Artif Intell 1999;27:49-78.
26. von Wright GH. Deontic logic: As I see it. In: McNamara P, Prakken H, editors. Norms, logics and information systems. New studies on deontic logic and computer science. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1999. pp 15-25.
27. Alchourrón CE, Bulygin E. The expressive conception of norms. In: Hilpinen R, editor. New studies in deontic logic: Norms, actions and the foundations of ethics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel; 1981. pp 95-124.
28. Alchourrón CE. Philosophical foundations of deontic logic and the logic of defeasible conditionals. In: Meyer J-J, Wieringa R, editors. Deontic logic in computer science: Normative system specification. New York: John Wiley; 1993. pp 43-84.
29. Makinson D. On a fundamental problem of deontic logic. In: McNamara P, Prakken H, editors. Norms, logics and information systems. New studies on deontic logic and computer science. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1999. pp 29-54.
30. Veltman F. Defaults in update semantics. J Philos Logic 1996;25:221-261.
31. van Benthem J. Exploring logical dynamics. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications; 1996.
32. Dignum F, Morley D, Sonenberg E, Cavedon L. Towards socially sophisticated BDI agents. In: Proc Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems (ICMAS-2000). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press; 2000. pp 111-118.
33. von Wright GH. Deontic logic. Mind 1951;60:1-15.
34. Broersen JM, Wieringa RJ, Meyer J-JCh. A fixed-point characterization of a deontic logic of regular action. Fundamenta Informaticae 2001;49:107-128.
35. Wieringa RJ, Meyer J-JCh. Applications of deontic logic in computer science: A concise overview. In: Meyer J-JCh, Wieringa RJ, editors. Deontic logic in computer science: Normative system specification. New York: Wiley; 1993. pp 17-40.
36. Dastani M, van der Torre L. Programming boid agents: A deliberation language for conflicts between mental attitudes and plans. In: Proc Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS'04). New York: ACM Press; 2004. pp 706-713.
37. Engelfriet J, Jonker CM, Treur J. Compositional verification of multi-agent systems in temporal multi-epistemic logic. J Logic Lang Inform 2002;11:195-225.
38. Jonker CM, Treur J. Compositional verification of multi-agent systems: A formal analysis of pro-activeness and reactiveness. In: de Roever WP, Langmaack H, Pnueli A, editors. Proc International Workshop on Compositionality, COMPOS'97, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1536. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 1998. pp 350-380.
39. de Roever WP, Langmaack H, Pnueli A, editors. Proc International Workshop on Compositionality, COMPOS'97. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1536. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 1998.