Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byHester Oliver Modified over 9 years ago
1
1 Computer Science Department California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA, U.S.A. Franz J. Kurfess CPE/CSC 580: Intelligent Agents 1
2
2 © Franz J. Kurfess Usage of the Slides ◆ these slides are intended for the students of my CPE/CSC 580 “Intelligent Agents” class at Cal Poly SLO ◆ if you want to use them outside of my class, please let me know (fkurfess@calpoly.edu)fkurfess@calpoly.edu ◆ some of them are based on other sources, which are identified and cited ◆ I usually select a subset for each quarter, either by hiding some slides, or creating a “Custom Show” (in PowerPoint) ◆ to view these, go to “Slide Show => Custom Shows”, select the respective quarter, and click on “Show” ◆ To print them, I suggest to use the “Handout” option ◆ 4, 6, or 9 per page works fine ◆ Black & White should be fine; there are few diagrams where color is important
3
3 © Franz J. Kurfess Course Overview ❖ Introduction Intelligent Agent, Multi-Agent Systems Agent Examples ❖ Agent Architectures Agent Hierarchy, Agent Design Principles ❖ Reasoning Agents Knowledge, Reasoning, Planning ❖ Learning Agents Observation, Analysis, Performance Improvement ❖ Multi-Agent Interactions Agent Encounters, Resource Sharing, Agreements ❖ Communication Speech Acts, Agent Communication Languages ❖ Collaboration Distributed Problem Solving, Task and Result Sharing ❖ Agent Applications Information Gathering, Workflow, Human Interaction, E-Commerce, Embodied Agents, Virtual Environments ❖ Conclusions and Outlook
4
4 © Franz J. Kurfess Overview Communication among Agents ❖ Motivation ❖ Objectives ❖ Communication speech acts; agent communication languages ❖ Cooperation self-interest, societal benefits ❖ Important Concepts and Terms ❖ Chapter Summary
5
5 © Franz J. Kurfess Bridge-In
6
6 © Franz J. Kurfess Pre-Test
7
7 © Franz J. Kurfess Motivation
8
8 © Franz J. Kurfess Objectives
9
9 © Franz J. Kurfess Evaluation Criteria
10
10 Communication Communication Basics Speech Acts Language: Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics
11
11 © Franz J. Kurfess Basic Concepts ❖ communication exchange of information requires a shared system of signs greatly enhanced by language speaker produces signs as utterances general: not only spoken language listener (hearer) perceives and interprets signs
12
12 [Woolridge 2009] Communication among Agents
13
13 © Franz J. Kurfess Purpose of Communication ❖ sharing of information among agents or systems query other agents for information responses to queries requests or commands actions to be performed for another agent offer proposition for collaboration acknowledgement confirmation of requests, offers sharing of experiences, feelings
14
14 © Franz J. Kurfess Communication Problems ❖ intention what is the expected outcome (speaker’s perspective) ❖ timing when is a communication act appropriate ❖ selection which act is the right one ❖ language what sign system should be used ❖ interpretation will the intended meaning be conveyed to the listener ❖ ambiguity can the intention be expressed without the possibility of misunderstandings
15
15 © Franz J. Kurfess Language and Communication ❖ Natural Language used by humans evolves over time moderately to highly ambiguous ❖ Formal Languages invented rigidly defined little ambiguity
16
16 © Franz J. Kurfess Natural Language ❖ formal description is very difficult sometimes non-systematic, inconsistent, ambiguous ❖ mostly used for human communication easy on humans tough on computers ❖ context is critical situation, beliefs, goals
17
17 © Franz J. Kurfess Formal Languages ❖ symbols terminal symbols finite set of basic words not: alphabet, characters non-terminal symbols intermediate structures composed of terminal or non-terminal symbols ❖ strings sequences of symbols ❖ phrases sub-strings grouping important parts of a string
18
18 © Franz J. Kurfess Formal Languages Cont. ❖ sentences allowable strings in a language composed from phrases ❖ grammar rules describing correct sentences often captured as rewrite rules in BNF notation ❖ lexicon list of allowable vocabulary words
19
19 © Franz J. Kurfess Communication Models ❖ encoded message model a definite proposition of the speaker is encoded into signs which are transmitted to the listener the listener tries to decode the signs to retrieve the original proposition errors are consequences of transmission problems ❖ situated language model the intended meaning of a message depends on the signals as well as the situation in which they are exchanged mis-interpretation may lead to additional problems
20
20 © Franz J. Kurfess Communication Types ❖ telepathic communication speaker and listener have a shared internal representation communication through Tell/Ask directives ❖ language-based communication speaker performs actions that produce signs which other agents can perceive and interpret communication language is different from the internal representation more complex involves several mappings language needs to be generated, encoded, transmitted, decoded, and interpreted
21
21 © Franz J. Kurfess Telepathic Communication [Russell & Norvig 1995]
22
22 © Franz J. Kurfess Language-Based Communication [Russell & Norvig 1995]
23
23 © Franz J. Kurfess Communication Steps: Speaker ❖ intention decision about producing a speech act ❖ generation conversion of the information to be transferred into the chosen language ❖ synthesis actions that produce the generated signs
24
24 © Franz J. Kurfess Communication Steps: Listener ❖ perception reception of the signs produced by the speaker speech recognition, lip reading, character recognition analysis syntactic interpretation (parsing) semantic interpretation disambiguation selection of the most probable intended meaning incorporation the selected interpretation is added to the existing world model as additional piece of evidence
25
25 © Franz J. Kurfess Communication Example [Russell & Norvig 1995] 25
26
26 Speech Acts Basics Speech Act Theory Mappings Components Semantics
27
27 © Franz J. Kurfess Speech Act ❖ used for the production of language ❖ independent of the communication mode talking, sign language, typing, flags ❖ word basic meaningful communicative sign smaller entities may exist e.g. syllable, phonem, letter don’t carry meaning ❖ speaker (sender) producer of an utterance ❖ hearer (listener, recipient) consumer of an utterance
28
28 © Franz J. Kurfess Speech Act Theory ❖ developed in linguistics, cognitive science, communication theory ❖ pragmatic theories of language based on language use ❖ utterances elementary speech actions based on or related to intentions ❖ different typologies of speech acts
29
29 [Woolridge 2009] 8-8 Speech Acts - Searle Searle (1969) identified various different types of speech act: representatives: such as informing, e.g., ‘It is raining’ directives: attempts to get the hearer to do something e.g., ‘please make the tea’ commissives: which commit the speaker to doing something, e.g., ‘I promise to… ’ expressives: whereby a speaker expresses a mental state, e.g., ‘thank you!’ declarations: such as declaring war or christening
30
30 [Woolridge 2009] 8-9 Speech Act Components a performative verb: e.g., request, inform, promise, … propositional content: e.g., “the door is closed”
31
31 [Woolridge 2009] 8-10 Speech Act Mappings Speech act performatives & content: performative = request content = “the door is closed” speech act = “please close the door” performative = inform content = “the door is closed” speech act = “the door is closed!” performative = inquire content = “the door is closed” speech act = “is the door closed?”
32
32 [Woolridge 2009] Speech Act Semantics intention of the speaker leads to a specific formulation of a statement interpretation by the listener may be different from the intended meaning methods from other AI areas have been applied e.g. planning
33
33 Agent Communication Languages standard formats for the exchange of knowledge and information usually based on messages
34
34 [Woolridge 2009] KQML KQML (Knowledge Query and Manipulation Language) developed by the ARPA knowledge sharing initiative KIF (Knowledge Interchange Format) designed to work in conjunction with KQML
35
35 [Woolridge 2009] KQML and KIF KQML is an ‘outer’ language defines various acceptable ‘communicative verbs’, or performatives Example performatives: ask-if (‘is it true that... ’) perform (‘please perform the following action... ’) tell (‘it is true that... ’) reply (‘the answer is... ’) KIF is a language for expressing message content related to knowledge representation languages
36
36 [Woolridge 2009] KIF – Knowledge Interchange Format Used to state: Properties of things in a domain e.g., “Orna is chairman” Relationships between things in a domain e.g., “Michael is Yael’s boss” General properties of a domain e.g., “All students are registered for at least one course”
37
37 [Woolridge 2009] KIF Examples “The temperature of m1 is 83 Celsius”: (= (temperature m1) (scalar 83 Celsius)) “An object is a bachelor if the object is a man and is not married”: (defrelation bachelor (?x) := (and (man ?x) (not (married ?x)))) “Any individual with the property of being a person also has the property of being a mammal”: (defrelation person (?x) :=> (mammal ?x))
38
38 [Woolridge 2009] KQML and KIF communication between agents requires a common set of terms ontology formal specification of a set of terms knowledge sharing requires defining common ontologies OWL - Web Ontology Language ontology editors Protégé
39
39 [Woolridge 2009] KQML/KIF Dialogue Example A to B: (ask-if (> (size chip1) (size chip2))) B to A: (reply true) B to A: (inform (= (size chip1) 20)) B to A: (inform (= (size chip2) 18))
40
40 [Woolridge 2009] Criticisms of KQML fluid performative set leading to interoperability problems transport mechanisms not precisely defined semantics not rigorously defined missing commissives performatives for making commitments performative set too large and ad hoc
41
41 [Woolridge 2009] FIPA Agent Communication Language program of agent standards initiated by the Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents (FIPA) the centerpiece is an ACL structure similar to KQML performatives 20 performatives in FIPA content the actual content of the message housekeeping e.g., sender, receiver,...
42
42 [Woolridge 2009] FIPA ACL Example Example: (inform :senderagent1 :receiveragent5 :content(price good200 150) :languagesl :ontologyhpl-auction )
43
43 [Woolridge 2009] FIPA Performatives
44
44 [Woolridge 2009] “Inform” and “Request” two basic performatives in FIPA all others are macro definitions defined in terms of “Inform” and “Request”. semantics of “Inform” and “Request” pre-condition what must be true in order for the speech act to succeed “rational effect” what the sender of the message hopes to bring about
45
45 [Woolridge 2009] “Inform” pre-condition is that the sender holds that the content is true intends that the recipient believe the content does not already believe that the recipient is aware of whether content is true or not content is a statement
46
46 [Woolridge 2009] 8-24 “Request” pre-condition is that the sender: intends action content to be performed believes recipient is capable of performing this action does not believe that receiver already intends to perform action content is an action
47
47 © Franz J. Kurfess Post-Test
48
48 © Franz J. Kurfess Evaluation ❖ Criteria
49
49 © Franz J. Kurfess Summary Communication
50
50 © Franz J. Kurfess Important Concepts and Terms ❖ agent ❖ Agent Communication Language ❖ alphabet ❖ ambiguity ❖ communication ❖ collaboration ❖ coordination ❖ formal language ❖ grammar ❖ hearer ❖ KIF ❖ KQML ❖ language ❖ lexicon ❖ listener ❖ multi-agent system ❖ natural language ❖ pragmatics ❖ recipient ❖ semantics ❖ sender ❖ sign ❖ speech act ❖ syntax ❖ utterance ❖ vocabulary
51
51 © Franz J. Kurfess
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.