Intelligent Agents: Technology and Applications Agent Teamwork

1. Intelligent Agents: Technology and ApplicationsAgent Teamwork IST 597B Spring 2003 John Yen

2. Learning Objectives: • Given an application that involves a group of agents, be able to identify its major characteristics (e.g., adhoc vs structured team etc). • For a specific types of agent team applications, be able to identify major issues related to the design of such agent teams. • Given an agent team applications, be able to determine whether a particular agent teamwork model/architecture (i.e., CAST) is suitable for the application.

3. Problem 1 Consider the following five applications involving agent teams, identify several key characteristics that are important for these applications. Use a table to compare the similarities and differences of these applications along these characteristics.

4. A team of agents that play Robot Soccer together. • A team including robots, soldiers, and software agents (for information fusion/delivery) in the battle field. • A team of software agents that support/automate the information exchanges and/or transactions of business partners (e.g., supplier of parts, manufacturers of products, distributors, ...) in a supply chain. • A group of agents that assist the companies they each represent to form coalitions for business opportunities. • A group of agents, each represent a user, interacts in an e-auction marketplace.

5. Characteristics • Team membership: Static vs dynamic • Shared goals vs individual goals • Benevolent vs selfish • Hierarchical vs Egalitarian • Homogenous vs Heterogeneous • Level of Trust • Coordination vs competition

6. Key Characteristics for Agent Teamwork • Benevolent (shared goals) vs selfish (individual goals) • Capabilities: Homogenous vs Heterogeneous • Membership of the Team: Static vs dynamic • Structure of the Team: Completely predefined, partially defined by roles, completely unspecified. • Types of the structure: Hierarchical vs Egalitarian • Process of the Team: Completely predetermined, partially specified, dynamically generated. • Human agent-software agent relationship: boss-assistant, peer, trainee-coach. • Relationship between members of the Group: Cooperative, partially cooperative, competitive. • The level of trust

7. Homework 3 (15%, team assignment, due April 8th) Compare the similarities and differences of the five agent teams using the key characteristics identified in class. Describe a (sixth) agent team application and characterize it using the characteristics.

8. Problem 2: (5%) • What are important issues related to these characteristics?

9. Related Issues - Team Structure • How to form a team? How to determine the structure of a team? • Important if the structure of the team is dynamically determined. • How to specify roles and assign responsibilities based on roles? • Important if the team structure is partially specified by roles. • How to reconfigure a team? • Important if members of the team may die or be overloaded • How to resolve conflicts in a team? • Important if the team does not have a hierarchical structure.

10. Related Issues - Team Process • How to specify, coordinate, and execute a team process? • If the process is partially/fully specified. • How to generate a team process (through planning)? • If the process is dynamically generated. • How to make sure emergent behavior achieves expected effects? • If the process is not specified.

11. Related Issues - Human-agent Relationship • How to give human users adequate control of agents? • If agents are assistant to human • How to enable agents to understand the mental states of human and the context of the interactions? • If agents are peer; and (to some degree) assistant. • How much can users trust agents? • How to design friendly interface to enables agents and user interact more effectively? • How to make agents human-like?

12. Related Issues - Cooperative/Competitive • How to enable agents to negotiate with others? • If agents are partially cooperative partially competitive • How does an agent balance intentions of others with intentions of self when they are conflicting. • If agents are not selfish less (I.e., partially self-centered).

13. Related Issues - Trust • How to establish/guarantee/revise trust? • Important if trust is important

14. Two Conflicting Objectives of Teamwork Models • Efficiency • Higher team performance • Reduced communications • Flexibility/Adaptability • Adapt the structure of the team • Adapt the process of the team • Adapt the responsibility assignment

15. Goals for CAST Teamwork Model • Achieves a high-level of efficiency with a reasonable degree of adaptability for applications with role-based structure and process.

16. Motivation Psychological Studies about Effective Human Teamwork Indicated that • Team members can anticipate needs of team mates • Team members can offer relevant information proactively. • These teamwork behaviors are based on an overlapping shared mental model.

17. Shared Mental Model • Shared Ontology • Shared Goals • Shared Team Structure • Shared Team Collaboration Process • Shared Belief about the Team • Shared Belief about the World • Shared Hypotheses about the Enemy

18. CAST Agent Architecture • Use a high-level language to describe teamwork knowledge • Capture “shared mental model” about team structure and process • Infers information needs (from SMM) • induces proactive information exchanges

19. Anticipating Information Needs of Teammates Dynamic Task Allocation Team Plan Responsibilities of Tasks Preconditions of Tasks Who needs what Information Needs

20. Dynamic Task Allocation Team Plan Roles of Agents in the Team Dynamic Task Allocation Constraints for Task Allocation My Belief about The World My Belief about Teammates

21. Proactive Information Delivery Information Information Needs Match ? My Belief about Teammates Does he/she know ? How to inform him/her? Communication Strategy

22. CAST Agent Architecture Belief Update Information Team Knowledge (MALLET) Responsibility Selection Belief Responsibilities (Petri Nets) Domain Knowledge Information Needs Identify Info Needs Act on Info Needs

23. Shared Mental Model in CAST • Prolog knowledge base: belief • MALLET: High-level language for representing team knowledge • Petri Nets: An agent’s internal representation of the dynamic teamwork processes and related information requirements

24. Relationships between SMM Components MALLET Compiler MALLET Knowledge Base Petri Net (team process) query Prolog Knowledge Base (belief) CAST Kernel reply

25. (team-plan T1 () (process (par (kill-wumpuses) (collect-gold)))) (team-plan kill-wumpuses () (agent-bind ?s (play-role ?s scout)) (agent-bind ?f (play-role ?f fighter)(closest ?f wumpus)) (process (while ((wumpus ?x) (not (dead ?x)))) (seq (do ?s (find-wumpus ?x)) (do ?f (move-to-wumpus ?x)) (do ?f (shoot-wumpus ?x))))) (team-plan find-gold () (agent-bind ?c (play-role ?c carrier)) (process (while (true) (if (see ?any-agent glitter) (do ?c (carrier-pickup gold)))) wumpus exists start find move shoot done pickup glitter no wumpuses left

26. CAST Development Environ. Circles are places and hold tokens denoting current execution state. Red indicates the presence of a token. Rectangles are transitions and are tested and executed when preceding places have tokens.

27. Two Types of Information needs • Action-performing information needs • enables an agent to perform certain (complex) actions, which contributes to an agent's individual commitments to the whole team. • Goal-protection information needs • allows an agent to protect a goal from potential threats that may result in a conflict with the goal.

28. Applications • Training for AWACS-like synthetic task (AFOSR MURI) • Support Agent-based Collaborative Mission Planning (Army Research Lab) • Simulating Digital TOC (STRICOM) • Negotiation among Agent Teams for Engineering Design (NSF)

29. Conclusion • A computational shared mental model is critical for developing agents that support a team involving both agents and human. • (PSU-TAMU) CAST enables proactive information delivery by anticipating needs of teammates. • MALLET facilitates the reuse of teamwork knowledge • CAST achieves efficiency using shared team plans and shared policy • CAST achieves adaptability by dynamic assignment of agent responsibility