KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Henry Hexmoor
University of Arkansas
Engineering Hall, Room 328
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Hexmoor
Content Outline

I. Introduction
1. History and perspectives on MultiAgent Systems
2. Architectural theories
3. Agent Oriented Software Engineering

II. Social agents
4. Sociality and social models
5. Dimensions for Developing a Social Agent
Crafting a Social Agent
Examples in Autonomy, Trust, Social Ties, Control, Team, Roles, Trust, and Norms
6. Agent as a member of a group...
Values, Obligations, Dependence, Responsibility, Emotions

III. Closing
7. Trends and open questions
8. Concluding Remarks
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Definitions
1.
An agent is an entity whose state is viewed as consisting of mental components
such as beliefs, capabilities, choices, and commitments. [Yoav Shoham, 1993]
2.
An entity is a software agent if and only if it communicates correctly in an agent
communication language. [Genesereth and Ketchpel, 1994]
3.
Intelligent agents continuously perform three functions: perception of dynamic
conditions in the environment; action to affect conditions in the environment; and
reasoning to interpret perceptions, solve problems, draw inferences, and determine
actions. [Hayes-Roth, 1995]
4.
An agent is anything that can be viewed as (a)Perceiving its environment, and (b)
Acting upon that environment [Russell and Norvig, 1995]
5.
A computer system that is situated in some environment and is capable of
autonomous action in its environment to meet its design objectives. [Wooldridge,
1999]
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agents: A working definition
An agent is a computational system that interacts with
one or more counterparts or real-world systems with
the following key features to varying degrees:
• Autonomy
• Reactiveness
• Pro-activeness
• Social abilities
e.g., autonomous robots, human assistants, service agents
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
The need for agents
1. Automation of dirty, dull, and dangerous as well as tedious, boring,
and routine tasks to relieve humans of such duties.
E.g., desktop assistants or intelligent in service of humans.
2. An improved human sense of “presence” for humans collaborating
in physically disparate locations.
E.g., knowledge management tasks like war-rooms and human users benefit from
agents who proxy for their human counterparts.
3.
Democratization of computing, services, and support.
E.g., functions such as the department of motor vehicles or public libraries and
virtual museums.
4.
Reduction of redundancy and overlap due to competition.
E.g., tracking and sharing power or telecommunication services.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agent Typology
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Person, Employee, Student, Nurse, or Patient
Artificial agents: owned and run by a legal entity
Institutional agents: a bank or a hospital
Software agents: Agents designed with software
Information agent: Data bases and the internet
Autonomous agents: Non-trivial independence
Interactive/Interface agents: Designed for interaction
Adaptive agents: Non-trivial ability for change
Mobile agents: code and logic mobility
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agent Typology
• Collaborative/Coordinative agents: Non-trivial ability
for coordination, autonomy, and sociability
• Reactive agents: No internal state and shallow
reasoning
• Hybrid agents: a combination of deliberative and
reactive components
• Heterogenous agents: A system with various agent
sub-components
• Intelligent/smart agents: Reasoning and intentional
notions
• Wrapper agents: Facility for interaction with nonagents
September 30, 2003
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Falacies: What Agent-based Systems are not
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Computational X where X is from the social sciences such as
the economics
Agents are not middleware components
Agents are not Grid Services
Agents are not Internet software
Agents need not dwell online
Agent-based Systems are not necessarily decision-support
systems
Agent-based Systems do not necessarily employ AI methods
Agents need not be implemented in specific programming
languages or paradigms
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Multi-agency
A multi-agent system is a system that is made up of multiple
agents with the following key features among agents to
varying degrees of commonality and adaptation:
• Social rationality
• Normative patterns
• System of Values
e.g., eCommerce, space missions, Intelligent Homes
The motivation is coherence and distribution of resources.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Summary of Business Benefits
• Modeling existing organizations and dynamics
• Modeling and Engineering E-societies
• New tools for distributed knowledge-ware
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Two views of Multi-agency
Constructivist: Agents are rational in the sense of
Newell’s principle of individual rationality. They only
perform goals which bring them a positive net benefit
without regard to other agents. These are self-interested
agents.
Sociality: Agents are rational in the Jennings’ principle of
social rationality. They perform actions whose joint benefit
is greater than its joint loss. These are self-less, responsible
agents.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Multi-agent assumptions and goals
• Agents have their own intentions and the system has
distributed intentionality
• Agents model other agents mental states in their own
decision making
• Agent internals are of less central than agents interactions
• Agents deliberate over their interactions
• Emergence at the agent level and at the interaction level are
desirable
• The goals is to find some principles-for or principled ways to
explore interactions
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Abstract Architecture
states
action
action
actions
Environment
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Architectures
• Deduction/logic-based
• Reactive
• BDI
• Layered (hybrid)
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Abstract Architectures

An abstract model: <States, Action, S*A>

An abstract view
S
= {s1, s2, …} – environment states
A=

{a1, a2, …} – set of possible actions
This allows us to view an agent as a function
action : S*  A
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Logic-Based Architectures
These agents have internal state
 See and next functions and model decision making by a set of
deduction rules for inference

see : S  P
next : D x P  D
action : D  A
Use logical deduction to try to prove the next action to take
 Advantages

Simple,

elegant, logical semantics
Disadvatages
Computational
complexity
Representing the real world
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Reactive Architectures

Reactive Architectures do not use

symbolic world model

symbolic reasoning

An example is Rod Brooks’s subsumption architecture

Advantages
 Simplicity,

computationally tractable, robust, elegance
Disadvantages
 Modeling
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
limitations, correctness, realism
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
BDI: a Formal Method
• Belief: states, facts, knowledge, data
• Desire: wish, goal, motivation (these might conflict)
• Intention: a) select actions, b) performs actions, c)
explain choices of action (no conflicts)
• Commitment: persistence of intentions and trials
• Know-how: having the procedural knowledge for carrying out a task
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Belief-Desire-Intention
Environment
belief
revision
sense
act
Beliefs
generate
options
Desires
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
filter
Intentions
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
A simplified BDI agent algorithm
1. B = B0;
2. I := I0;
3. while true do
4.
get next percept r;
5.
B := brf(B, r);
// belief revision
6.
D:=options(B,D,I);
// determination of desires
7.
I := filter(B, D, I);
// determination of intentions
8.
p := plan(B, I);
// plan generation
9.
execute p
10. end while
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Correspondences
• Belief-Goal compatibility:
Des  Bel
• Goal-Intention Compatibility:
Int  Des
• Volitional Commitment:
Int Do  Do
• Awareness of Goals and Intentions:
Des  BelDes
Int  BelInt
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Layered Architectures

Layering is based on division of behaviors into automatic
and controlled.

Layering might be Horizontal (I.e., I/O at each layer) or
Vertical (I.e., I/O is dealt with by single layer)

Advantages are that these are popular and fairly intuitive
modeling of behavior

Dis-advantages are that these are too complex and nonuniform representations
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agent-Oriented Software Engineering
 AOSE
is an approach to developing software
using agent-oriented abstractions that models high
level interactions and relationships.
 Agents
are used to model run-time decisions
about the nature and scope of interactions that are
not known ahead of time.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
AOSE Considerations: Track 1

Programming platforms (e.g., JACK) to support not just
programming and design

What, how many, structure of agent?

Model of the environment?

Communication? Protocols? Relationships? Coordination?
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
AOSE Considerations: Track 2

Extending UML to support agent communication,
negotiation etc.

Communication? Protocols? Relationships? Coordination?
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Gaia- Wooldridge, et al
The Analysis phase:
Roles model:
- Permissions (resources)
- Responsibilities (Safety properties and Liveliness
properties)
- Protocols
Interactions model: purpose, initiator, responder, inputs,
outputs, and processing of the conversation
The Design phase:
Agent model
Services model
Acquaintance model
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Scott DeLoach’s MaSE
Roles
Tasks
Agent Class
Diagram
Sequence
Diagrams
Conversation
Diagram
Internal Agent
Diagram
Deployment
Diagram
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Break– 5 minutes
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor


Content Outline
Crafting a Social Agent
I. Introduction
1. History and perspectives on MultiAgent Systems
2. Architectural theories
3. Agent Oriented Software Engineering
Break 5 minutes
II. Social agents
4. Sociality and social models
5. Dimensions for Developing a Social Agent
Examples in Autonomy, Trust, Social Ties, Control, Team, Roles, Trust, and Norms
Break 5 minutes
6. Agent as a member of a group...
Values, Obligations, Dependence, Responsibility, Emotions

III. Closing
7. Trends and open questions
8. Concluding Remarks
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
A Multiagent System Top level loop
Initialize Groups, Interconnections
For agents 1- n {
While (1) {
Sense (self, world, others)
Reason (self, others)
Act (physical, speech, social)
}
}
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Inside an agent…
While (1) {
Sense (self, world, others)
Determine attitude (self, others)
Reason (self, others)
Act (physical, speech, social)
}
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
What is Sociality?
• In interactions one individual’s thinking, feeling, and/or doing affects
another individual.
• “” may involve a social action, a social convention, and a personal
rationality.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
What is Sociality?
• An individual may engage collectives in interaction of thinking,
feeling, and/or doing.
• “” may involve a social action, a social convention, and a unit
rationality.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
What is Sociality?
• An agent may engage a human in interaction of thinking, feeling,
and/or doing.
• “” may involve a social action, a social convention, and a personal
rationality.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
Think, Feel, Do
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
What is Social Action?
• Social actions produce different kinds of influences.
• For example actions involving Resources, Delegation,
Permission, Help, and Service.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
What is Social Convention?
• Social conventions prescribe transformations of social
influences as well as shifts and changes in the
transformations.
• Examples:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interpersonal tactics such as reciprocity, scarcity, and politeness.
Use of norms, values, plans, policies, protocols, and roles.
Following a conversational policy.
Emotional reactive responses
Cooperation logics
Adaptations and emergence rules
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
What is Personal/Unit Rationality?
• Personal/unit Rationality prescribes stance of an individual
or a collective toward social conventions with respect to
others.
• An agent/collective might choose to follow or abandon
social conventions either with all agents or selectively.
• Social Rationality versus Individual Rationality
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Putting it together (CEBACR):
A social model of interaction
Crafting a Social Agent
<Cognition,
Emotions,
Behaviors,
Social Actions,
Social Conventions,
Personal/Unit Rationality,
Embodiment>
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
A Special Case of Do  Do Sociality
• [Do]  [Do]
• Actions are “buy” and “sell”
• Social Conventions are conventions of bartering.
• Personal/Unit Rationality is accounting for utilities of self or
others. This can be simple or extend to issues of reciprocity
and goodwill.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
A Social Agent
•
An agents that has to interact with people, other agent(s),
where it is affected and can affect others’ cognitive states,
emotions, and/or behavior via social actions, social
conventions, a personal rationality.
•
Generally, such agents are more complex than reactive
agents and must include social perception in their
deliberation.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
A Social Agent
•
We cannot merely add social modules to prefabricated
agents. Social makeup of such agents are found in all
aspects of their architecture and must be designed from
the start.
•
We must at least have access to an agent’s social model:
<Cognition, Emotions, Behaviors, Social actions, Social
Conventions, Personal Rationality>
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
A Social Agent
Socially intelligent agents are biological or artificial
agents that show elements of (humanstyle) social
intelligence. The term artificial social intelligence
refers then to an instantiation of human-style social
intelligence in artificial agents. (Dautehahn 1998)
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Social Inference
Cognitive
Observing Interpersonal Exchanges
Inferred Attitudes
and Relationships
Inferred Social Import
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Emotions in communication
Illocution in communication
Gesture Goals and plans
Body Language
Capability
Attitude
Commonalities in goals and plans
Social ties
Psychological states
Benevolence Dependence
Trust
Power
Norms
Team
Autonomy
Coherence
Values
Control
Sub-cognitive
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Situatedness
•
Physically situatedness promotes frequent sampling of
physical environment, feedback via physical
environment… as in the Subsumption architecture
•
Socially situatedness promotes frequent sampling of
environment (gossip), feedback via social interaction… to
new agent architectures
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Levels of Sociality
•
There are many MAS or HAI problems that are
deterministic and would not require social reasoning. I.e.,
agent’s actions would not depend on others and if so it is
pre-determined. At best, sociality is a luxury.
•
There are scenarios where sociality, explicit reasoning
about other agent’s or human actions are critical and it is
not all predetermined. This requires high level of sociality.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Social delegation
• E.g., X gives Y permission and authority to make decisions
for their organization
• Social delegation differs from physical delegation in that
agents will have a “cognitive” exchange in stead of a
physical one.
• Models of social delegation might be economic (utilitarian),
dependency (in-debtedness), power-based (authority), or
democratic.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Dimensions for Developing a Social Agent
Culture
Social Environment
Multi-Agent
Emotions
Social and collaborative notions
Cultural shifts in
institutions organizations
Public skills
Modeling other
agents …
Tasks;
Adherence to norms, Resources;
values, obligations, Ontologies Communication and
Community
power, org rules…
exchange
Awareness…
Emergent Norms
and roles
Adaptation and changes
in reasoning about
basic social notions
Organization
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Planning and
learning abilities
Communication and
exchange
Initiative, Autonomy,
Power, Control, …
Anthropomorphism
Language realism
Collaboration: Trust, safety,
flexible roles, policies, preferences
Emotions
Team
Human
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Dimensions for Developing a Social Agent
Culture
Community
Social Environment
Multi-Agent
Asynchronous : Sit Aware : Real-time
Communication
Info sharing
Coordination
Organization
Human
Team
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Social Environment
Agents that are embedded in social environments must be
designed to account for the following needs:
•
•
•
•
Social tasks
Shared Resources
Ontologies
Public skills related to tasks and resources such as
requesting and delegating
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agents in Public Service

Interactions with the public beyond individuals
 Public
libraries
 Museums
 Shopping malls
 Transportation stations
 Billboards and road signs
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Multiagent
Agents that can relate to other agents must be designed to
account for the following needs:
•
•
•
•
•
Communication and exchange of information,
Modeling other agents and rationality: altruism and
benevolence,
Planning and learning abilities,
Social and collaborative notions: Autonomy, Values,
Norms, Obligations, Dependence, Control, Responsibility,
Roles, Preference, Power, Trust, Teaming, Persona.
Emotional communication.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agents in automation of dirty, dull, and dangerous
tasks








Intelligent homes
Factories
Telecommunications
Power Plants
Investment
Transportation
Electronic Customer Relations Management
Cross Organizational Relations
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Multiagent: Shared Autonomy Among Personal Satellite
Assistants
PSAs reason about
commitments to teaming
to respond to alarms
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Autonomy Sources

Capability

Social ties… benevolence, permissions, peer pressure
(autonomy norm), reciprocity, norm sanctions
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Trust Can mean different things

Expectation of partner’s competence- Cristiano Castelfranchi

Expectation of partner’s benign intent- Diego Gambetti

Trust as a reputation and a recommendation- Mike Schillo

Correct Expectations about partner’s actions- Patha Dasgupta

Trust as reliable contract- Svet Brainov
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Social Ties

Social ties between agents affects social relationships.

Trust and autonomy are increased with stronger ties.

Communities are more robust with ties.

Network structures embody collective properties of their
community.
Performance
Number of ties
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Models of Trust and Autonomy 2002
Trusting value(A, B, t) = Capability(B, t) +
Benevolence(B, A, t) + Delegation harmony(A,B)
Autonomy value (A, t) = Capability(A, t) + Average
Trust (A) + Balance of reciprocity()
6
Tb
4
Ab
An
2
Tn
22
15
8
0
1
Average Autono m y
Average T rust &

Time
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Terraforming Mars 2002

Trust(Aj, Ak, t) = Trust(Aj, Ak, t-1) –
(rate * Trust(Aj, Ak, t-1) +
(rate * (gain - investment))
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Human
Agents that can relate to humans socially must be designed to
account for the following needs:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Communication and exchange of information,
Human intent and preferences,
Human need for anthropomorphic appeal,
Nested representations of humans and agents,
Human policies for interaction and guidance,
Collaborative requirements, and
Emotional communication
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Trust

Reasons for trust in agents:

Preference to delegate: an human operator might want another
agent who has more time or resources to carry out a task

Human-agent relations: Agents can use human their understanding
of human models of trust to interact with humans
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Autonomy
• Human-Agent Interaction
• Adjustable Autonomy
HAI: Shared Autonomy between an Air Traffic
Control assistant agent and the human operator
ATC agent and
human
operators learn
to share and
trade
autonomies
HAI: UCAV formations
•UCAVs reason about
helping in attack
situations
•HA power
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Organization
Agents that must operate in organizations must be designed to
account for the following needs:
•
•
•
Awareness of organizational rules, and structure,
Ability to evolve and recognize emergent norms and roles,
and
Adaptation and changes in reasoning about basic social
notions.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Knowledge Management




Data storage and retrieval functions
Indigenous ontologies
Norms and Policies
Institutions
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Norms
• Involve two or more agents.
Each agent
understands and shares them.
• Agents have power to not choose them.
• There is no direct rational account of them
available to the agents.
• The bearer experiences an implicit or an explicit
sanction or rewards for adoption.
City grid - 2003
• Collisions cost agents time and
intersections are out for a period.
• Agents must reason about norms
of stopping for traffic lights or not
based on comparisons of their
gains and losses relative to the
society
• Adaptive norm revision
outperforms prescriptive norm
assignment
Multiagent: Shared Autonomy Among Low-orbit
Satellites
Satellites learn to recruit
and form teams for
collaborative image
gathering
Roles
• Several agents can adopt it individually, independently, and
concurrently. One agent may adopt several simultaneously. Several
agents may adopt it as a group. In general we will call this the
adopter.
• It is meaningful in the social context of other agents including (a)
the adopter’s relationship to other agents and groups, (b) the agent’s
mental attitudes about the social relationships, and (b) the available
norms including obligations and responsibilities.
• There are typical capabilities associated with the adopter. If the
adopter loses these abilities then the efficacy of the role is
jeopardized.
Roles
• Networks of roles are more clearly seen in role-based
access control.
• Role hierarchy and role grouping are useful for selecting
subsequent roles [Moffett and Lupu, 1999, Na and Cheon,
2000].
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Culture
Agents that are culturally embedded must be designed to
account for the following needs:
•
•
Ability to reason about adherence to norms, values,
obligations, organizational rules, etc., and
Ability to recognize shifts in culture of their organizations
and institutions
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agent Historians and Dictionaries

Nuances of cultural shifts
 Norms
 Laws
 Institutions

Collaborative filtering
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Break– 5 minutes
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor


Content Outline
Crafting a Social Agent
I. Introduction
1. History and perspectives on MultiAgent Systems
2. Architectural theories
3. Agent Oriented Software Engineering
Break 5 minutes
II. Social agents
4. Sociality and social models
5. Dimensions for Developing a Social Agent
Examples in Autonomy, Trust, Social Ties, Control, Team, Roles, Trust, and Norms
Break 5 minutes
6. Agent as a member of a group...
Values, Obligations, Dependence, Responsibility, Emotions

III. Closing
7. Trends and open questions
8. Concluding Remarks
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Agent as a member of a group...
agent
honors
handles
partakes
roles
obligations
goals
specifies
plans
norms
institution
partakes
values
(terminal
goals)
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
inherits
set/
borrow
organization
member of
shares
relies on
contains
group
partakes
September 30, 2003
Values
• "value" might mean:
(a)assessment of usefulness of an object or
action relative to a purpose, I.e.,
"(instrumental) evaluations", E.g., ="this
knife is good for chip carving ",
(b) absolute assessment of desirability of
something, I.e, “principles”, E.g., "honesty is
good"
• Adding value to an agent enables it to generate
internal desires as well as adds a level of
behavior predictability for other agents.
Obligations
• Obligations capture all forms of social influence.
• Obligations have a strong deontological and
motivational senses (more so than norms)
• Obligations are frequently assumed to have
penalties associated with the failure to meet the
obligation. We make no such assumption; some
obligations may have sanctions and some may not.
Responsibilities
• There are several types of responsibility:
(a)Responsibility to concerns an agent’s obligation
to perform an action.
(b)Responsibility for concerns an agent’s obligation
to see that a state of affairs obtains.
(c) Responsibility about is the agent’s obligation to
behave in accordance with its principles, which
is general, abstract, and typically with respect to
an agent’s immutable values.
Responsibilities, CAST project [Yen, et al. 2001]
•Agents are represented as nodes of a graph.
•One type of labeled directed edge is between two
agents (A t B), and it represents that A delegates
t to B or conversely B is responsible to A with
respect to t.
•The delegation relationships is non-reflexive, antisymmetric, and transitive. The transitive property
can be used to establish implied relationships.
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
The big picture
Norms
Values
Obligationsab (i.e., responsibility)
Dependenceba
Delegationba
Emerson, 1962
Tuomela, 2000
Trustba
(Powerab
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
Autonomy
Mayer, et al
1995
,
Controlab)
Tuomela, 2000
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Emotions

Emotions provide possibilities for bypassing chains of
reasoning to protect the agent in dangerous situations or to
enable it to work with agents that have not been beneficial
in the past.

HAI: quick feedback by human or agent; human appeal

Multiagent: Appraisal of situations
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Emotions

Emotions Theories: correspondence between emotions and
behavioral situations. Feeling good a or bad into emotions…

Personality Theories: Individual differences that affect emotional
relationships
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor

Content Outline
Crafting a Social Agent
I. Introduction
1. History and perspectives on multiagents
2. Architectural theories
3. Agent Oriented Software Engineering
Break 5 minutes

II. Social agents
4. Sociality and social models
5. Dimensions for Developing a Social Agent
Examples in Autonomy, Trust, Social Ties, Control, Team, Roles, Trust, and Norms
Break 5 minutes
6. Agent as a member of a group...
Values, Obligations, Dependence, Responsibility, Emotions

III. Closing
7. Trends and open questions
8. Concluding Remarks
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor

Content Outline
Crafting a Social Agent
I. Introduction
1. History and perspectives on multiagents
2. Architectural theories
3. Agent Oriented Software Engineering

II. Social agents
4. Sociality and social models
5. Autonomy, Team, Values, Norms, Obligations, Dependence,
Control, Responsibility, Roles, Trust, Emotions

III. Closing
6. Trends and open questions
7. Concluding Remarks
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Current Trends
Pervasive and emerging agent applications: agent
mediated e-commerce, emotional agents, embodied
agents, virtual characters, conversational agents, etc.


Standardization efforts: FIPA.

New Initiatives: semantic web initiative.
 Agent
tournaments: RoboCup, Trading Agent
Competition.
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Concluding Remarks

There are many uses for
 Agents:
These are highly intuitive and expressive
 Multiagent Systems: These provide methods for defining
institutions and working models of sociological theories

Many open problems area available
 Theoretical
issues for modeling social elements such as
autonomy, power, trust, dependency, norms,
preference, responsibilities, security, …
 Adaptation and learning issues
 Communication and conversation issues
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Further Explorations










[email protected]
Agents.umbc.edu
http://www.AgentLink.org/
http://www.multiagent.com/
http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~comqk
d/aaai-social.html
http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/4/4.html
http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/
http://www.stephenmarsh.ca/
http://www.iiia.csic.es/
http://www.salford.ac.uk/cve/va99/online99.htm
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Hexmoor
Crafting a Social Agent
Further Explorations







http://orgwis.gmd.de/projects/SocialWeb/
http://bruce.edmonds.name/ssi/
http://www.casos.ece.cmu.edu/home_frame.
html
http://bruce.edmonds.name/sfs/
http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/4/1/conten
ts.html
http://www.isi.edu/teamcore/
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~nrj/socrat.html
KIMAS 2003 Tutorial
September 30, 2003
Descargar

Agents - Southern Illinois University Carbondale