Lecture 7 Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 7 University “Politehnica” of Bucarest 2005 - 2006 Adina Magda Florea

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Approaches, Tools, and Applications Islam A. El-Shaarawy Shoubra Faculty of Eng.
Advertisements

Chapter 09 AI techniques in different game genres (Puzzle/Card/Shooting)
Project Management Concepts
Pat Langley Computational Learning Laboratory Center for the Study of Language and Information Stanford University, Stanford, California USA
The Management Process
ARCHITECTURES FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS
Intelligent Architectures for Electronic Commerce Part 1.5: Symbolic Reasoning Agents.
FIPA Interaction Protocol. Request Interaction Protocol Summary –Request Interaction Protocol allows one agent to request another to perform some action.
JSIMS 28-Jan-99 1 JOINT SIMULATION SYSTEM Modeling Command and Control (C2) with Collaborative Planning Agents Randall Hill and Jonathan Gratch University.
Snap-stabilizing Committee Coordination Borzoo Bonakdarpour Stephane Devismes Franck Petit IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium.
Title: Intelligent Agents A uthor: Michael Woolridge Chapter 1 of Multiagent Systems by Weiss Speakers: Tibor Moldovan and Shabbir Syed CSCE976, April.
Some questions o What are the appropriate control philosophies for Complex Manufacturing systems? Why????Holonic Manufacturing system o Is Object -Oriented.
The AGILO Autonomous Robot Soccer Team: Computational Principles, Experiences, and Perspectives Michael Beetz, Sebastian Buck, Robert Hanek, Thorsten Schmitt,
Chesapeake Bay Program Goal Development, Governance, and Alignment Carin Bisland, GIT6 Vice Chair.
Supporting the Requirement for Flexibility in Automated Business Processes using Intelligent Agents Stewart Green University of the West of England.
Effective Coordination of Multiple Intelligent Agents for Command and Control The Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University PI: Katia Sycara
Chapter 4 DECISION SUPPORT AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Coalition Formation through Motivation and Trust Nathan Griffiths Michael Luck.
Concrete architectures (Section 1.4) Part II: Shabbir Ssyed We will describe four classes of agents: 1.Logic based agents 2.Reactive agents 3.Belief-desire-intention.
Formal Model of Joint Achievement Intention Mao Xinjun MOCA’02, Aarhus University, Aug 26-27, 2002 National Lab. for Parallel and.
Marakas: Decision Support Systems, 2nd Edition © 2003, Prentice-Hall Chapter Chapter 7: Expert Systems and Artificial Intelligence Decision Support.
4-1 Chapter 4: PRACTICAL REASONING An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems
The Nature of Groups Ch. 8.
1 Chapter 19 Intelligent Agents. 2 Chapter 19 Contents (1) l Intelligence l Autonomy l Ability to Learn l Other Agent Properties l Reactive Agents l Utility-Based.
Distributed Systems Fall 2009 Distributed transactions.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All rights reserved ©2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All rights reserved McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Chapter One Theories of Learning
Lecture 10 Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 10 Computer Science WPI Spring 2002 Adina Magda Florea
Why Analysis Process Refer to earlier chapters Models what the system will do makes it easier for understanding no environment considered (hence, system.
Enabling Organization-Decision Making
Managing Social Influences through Argumentation-Based Negotiation Present by Yi Luo.
Collectively Cognitive Agents in Cooperative Teams Jacek Brzeziński, Piotr Dunin-Kęplicz Institute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of Sciences Barbara.
Multi-Agent Systems University “Politehnica” of Bucarest Spring 2003 Adina Magda Florea
Multi-Agent Systems University “Politehnica” of Bucarest Spring 2010 Adina Magda Florea curs.cs.pub.ro.
Goal Setting The foundation of a plan for success includes goal setting and the achievement of goals.
Business Analysis and Essential Competencies
Chapter 10 THE NATURE OF WORK GROUPS AND TEAMS. CHAPTER 10 The Nature of Work Groups and Teams Copyright © 2002 Prentice-Hall What is a Group? A set of.
L 9 : Collaborations Why? Terminology Coherence Coordination Reference s :
Group Success. What is a group?  2 or more individuals who have a shared objective which will bring about interaction. Characteristics of a group  A.
Feb 24, 2003 Agent-based Proactive Teamwork John Yen University Professor of IST School of Information Sciences and Technology The Pennsylvania State University.
SIF8072 Distributed Artificial Intelligence and Intelligent Agents 6 February 2003 Lecture 4: Coordination Working Together.
Lecture Topics covered CMMI- - Continuous model -Staged model PROCESS PATTERNS- -Generic Process pattern elements.
Ayestarán SergioA Formal Model for CPS1 A Formal Model for Cooperative Problem Solving Based on: Formalizing the Cooperative Problem Solving Process [Michael.
Architectural Design of Distributed Applications Chapter 13 Part of Design Analysis Designing Concurrent, Distributed, and Real-Time Applications with.
Title: Diagnosing a team of agents: Scaling up Written by: Meir Kalech and Gal A. Kaminka Presented by: Reymes Madrazo-Rivera.
Chapter 4 Decision Support System & Artificial Intelligence.
Lecture 3 Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 3 University “Politehnica” of Bucarest Adina Magda Florea
A Quantitative Trust Model for Negotiating Agents A Quantitative Trust Model for Negotiating Agents Jamal Bentahar, John Jules Ch. Meyer Concordia University.
Distributed Models for Decision Support Jose Cuena & Sascha Ossowski Pesented by: Gal Moshitch & Rica Gonen.
Multiagent System Katia P. Sycara 일반대학원 GE 랩 성연식.
Project Management.
Software Engineering Introduction.
Intelligent Agents: Technology and Applications Agent Communications IST 597B Spring 2003 John Yen.
Lecture 9 Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 9 University “Politehnica” of Bucarest Adina Magda Florea
Artificial Intelligence Chapter 23 Multiple Agents Biointelligence Lab School of Computer Sci. & Eng. Seoul National University.
Artificial Intelligence
Organisations – Groups and Teams
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
Intelligent Agents Chapter 2. How do you design an intelligent agent? Definition: An intelligent agent perceives its environment via sensors and acts.
Lecture 4 Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 4 Computer Science WPI Spring 2002 Adina Magda Florea
Intelligent Agents: Technology and Applications Unit Five: Collaboration and Task Allocation IST 597B Spring 2003 John Yen.
MIS Project Management Instructor: Sihem Smida Project Man agent 3Future Managers1.
Foundations of Group Behavior Week 6 lecture 11,12.
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning
Software Engineering (CSI 321)
Job design & job satisfaction
CMSC 691M Agent Architectures & Multi-Agent Systems
Job design & job satisfaction
Presentation transcript:

Lecture 7 Multi-Agent Systems Lecture 7 University “Politehnica” of Bucarest Adina Magda Florea

Working together - cont Lecture outline 1 Modeling coordination by shared mental states 2 Joint action and conventions

Collective mental states (a) Common knowledge n Every member in group G knows pE G p  ai  G K ai p - shared knowledge n Every member in G knows E G pE 2 G p  E G (E G p) n Every member knows that every member knows that every … E k+1 G p  E G (E K G p)k  1 n Common knowledge C G p  p  E G p  E 2 G p  …  E k G p  Modeling coordination by shared mental states

(b) Mutual belief n E G p   ai  G a i Belp - Every one in group G believes p - shared belief n E 2 G p  E G (E G p) n E k+1 G p  E G (E K G p)k  1 n M G p  E G p  E 2 G p  …  E k G p  …- Mutual belief 4

(c) Joint intentions (Levesque & Cohen, 1990) C 1 ) each agent in the group has a goal p  a i  G a i Intp Modal operators of temporal logic p U q - p is true until q becomes true - until Xp - p is true in the next moment - next Pp - p was true in a past moment - past Fp - p will eventually be true in the future - eventually Gp - p will always be true in the future – always Ap - at a particular time moment, p is true in all paths emanating from that point - inevitable p Ep - at a particular time moment, p is true in some path emanating from that point - optional p 5

n s is true in each time point (situation) and on all path n r is true in each time point on a single path n p will eventually be true on a single path n q will eventually be true on all path 6 rsrs s sqsq rsrs psqpsq rsqrsq s AGs EGr AFq EFp r - Alice is in Italy p -Alice visits Paris s – Paris is the capital of Franceq - it is spring time F - eventually G - always A - inevitable E - optional

(c) Joint intentions - cont C 1 ) each agent in the group has a goal p  a i  G a i Intp C 2 ) each agent will persist with this goal until it is mutually believed that p has been achieved or that p cannot be achieved  a i  G a i Int (A Fp)  A ( a i Int(A Fp)  (M G (Achieve p)  M G (  Achieve p))) C 3 ) conditions (C 1 ) and (C 2 ) are mutually believed M G (C 1 )  M G (C 2 ) 7 F - eventually G - always A - inevitable E - optional

(d) Joint commitments Agents in the group: n have a joint goal n agree they wish to cooperate n the group becomes jointly committed to achieve the goal (joint goal) Joint intentions can be seen as a joint commitment to a joint action while in a certain shared mental state 8

3 Joint action and conventions 3.1 Conventions An agent should honor its commitments provided the circumstances do not change. Conventions = describe circumstances under which an agent should reconsider its commitments An agent may have several conventions but each commitment is tracked using one convention 9

n Commitments n Commitments provide a degree of predictability so that the agents can take future activity of other agents in consideration when dealing with inter-agent dependencies  the necessary structure for predictable interactions n Conventions n Conventions constrain the conditions under which commitments should be reassesed and specify the associated actions that should be undertaken: retain, rectify or abandon the commitment  the necessary degree of mutual support 10

3.2 Specifying conventions Reasons for re-assessing the commitment n commitment satisfied n commitment unattainable n motivation for commitment no longer present Actions R1: if commitment satisfied or commitment unattainable or motivation for commitment no longer present then drop commitment p But such conventions are asocial constructs; they do not specify how the agent should behave towards the other agents if: –it has a goal that is inter-dependent –it has a joint commitment to a joint goal 11

Social Conventions Inter-dependent goals Invoke when: Inter-dependent goals local commitment dropped local commitment satisfied motivation for local commitment no longer present R1: if local commitment satisfied or local commitment dropped or motivation for local commitment no longer present then inform all related commitments Joint commitment to a joint goal Invoke when: Joint commitment to a joint goal status of commitment to joint goal changes status of commitment to attaining joint goal in the team context changes status of commitment of another team member changes R1: if status of commitment to joint goal changes or status of commitment in the team context changes then inform all other team members of the change R2: if status of commitment of another team member changes then determine whether joint commitment is still viable 12

3.3 An example of joint action and conventions GRATE System (Generic Rules and Agent model Testbed Environment, Jennings, 1994) ARCHONelectricity distribution management cement factory control Electricity distribution management of the traffic network distinguish between disturbances and pre-planned maintenance operations identify the type (transient or permanent), origin and extend of faults when they occur determine how to restore the network after a fault 3 agents AAA - the Alarm Analysis Agent  perform diagnosis to different levels BAI - the Blackout Area Identifier of precision and on different info CSI - Control System Interface  detects the disturbance initially and then monitors the network evolving state 13

14 COOPERATION MODULE SITUATION ASSESMENT MODULE Acquaintance Models Self Model Information store CONTROL MODULE Task2 Task3Task1 Communication Manager Inter-agent communication Cooperation & Control Layer Domain Level System CONTROL DATA GRATE Agent Architecture

(a) Agent behavior 1. Select goal and develop plan to achieve goal 2. Determine if plan can be executed individually or cooperatively (a) joint action is needed (joint goal)or (b) action solved entirely locally 3. if (a) then the agent becomes the organiser 3.1. Establish joint action - the organiser carries on the distributed planning protocol 3.2. Perform individual actions in joint action 3.3. Monitor joint action 4. if (b) then perform individual actions 5. if request for joint action then the agent becomes team-member 5.1. Participate in the planning protocol to establish joint action 5.2. Perform individual actions in joint actions (3.2 and 5.2 adequately sequenced) 15

(b) Establish joint action GRATE Distributed Planning Protocol PHASE 1 1. Organiser detects need for joint action to achieve goal G and determines that plan P is the best means of attaining it - SAM 2. Organiser contacts all acquaintances capable of contributing to P to determine if they will participate in the joint action - CM 3. Let L  set of willing acquaintances PHASE 2 4. for all actions B in P do - select agent A  L to carry out action B - calculate time t B for B to be performed based on temporal orderings of P - send (B, t B ) proposal to A - receive reply from A - if not rejected then - if time proposal modified then update remaining actions by  t - eliminate B from P 5. if B is not empty then repeat step 4 16 Agent A 1. Evaluate proposal (B, t B ) against existing commitments 2. if no conflicts then create commitment C B to (B, t B ) 3. if conflicts ((B, t B ), C) and priority(B) > priority(C) then create C B and reschedule C 4. if conflicts ((B, t B ), C) and priority(B) < priority(C) then if freetime (t B +  t) then note C B and return (t B +  t) else return reject

Joint intention - Phase 1 for agent AAA Name: Diagnose-fault Motivation: Disturbance-detection-message Plan: { S1: Identify_blackout_area, S2: Hypothesis_generation, S3: Monitor_disturbance, S4: Detailed_diagnosis, S2 < S4} Start time:Maximum end time: Duration: Priority: 20 Status: Establish group Outcome: Validated_fault_hypothesis Participants: ((Self organiser agreed_objective) (CSI team-member agreed_objective) (BAI team-member agreed_objective)) Bindings: NIL Proposed contribution: ((Self (Hypothesis_generation yes) (Detailed_diagnosis yes)) (CSI (Monitor_disturbance yes) (BAI (Identify_blackout_area yes))) 17

Joint action - Phase 2 for agent AAA Name: Diagnose-fault Motivation: Disturbance-detection-message Status: Establish plan Start time: 19 Maximum end time: 45 Bindings: ((BAI Identify_blackout_area 19 34) (Self Hypothesis_generation 19 30) (CSI Monitor_disturbance 19 36) (Self Detailed_diagnosis 36 45)) …. n BAI's individual intention for producing the blackout area Name: Achieve Identify_blackout_area Motivation: Satisfy Joint Action Diagnose-fault Start time: 19 Maximum end time: 34 Duration: 15 Priority: 5 Status: Pending Outcome: Blackout_area 18

(c) Monitor the execution of joint action Recognize situations that change commitments and impact joint action R1 match : if task t has finished executing and t has produced the desired outcome of the joint action then the joint goal is satisfied R2 match : if receive information i and i is relevant to the triggering conditions for joint goal G and i invalidates beliefs for wanting G then the motivation for G is no longer present Social conventions R1 inform : if joint action has successfully finished then inform all team members of successful completion and see if result should be disseminated outside the team R2 inform : if motivation for joint goal G is no longer present then inform other members of the team that G needs to be abandoned Rules to indicate what to do if change in commitments ……….. 19

References o Multiagent Systems - A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, G. Weiss (Ed.), The MIT Press, 2001, Ch.2.3, o V.R. Lesser. A retrospective view of FA/C distributed problem solving. IEEE Trans. On Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(6), Nov/Dec 1991, p o N.R. Jennings. Coordination techniques for distributed artificial intelligence. In Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence, G. O'hara, N.R; Jennings (Eds.), John Wiley&Sons, o N.R. Jennings. Controlling cooperative problem solving in industrial multi-agent systems using joint intentions. Artificial Intelligence 72(2), o E.H. Durfee. Scaling up agent coordination strategies. IEEE Computer, 34(7), July 2001, p