1 / 21

An Alternative Classification of Agent Types based on BOID Conflict Resolution

An Alternative Classification of Agent Types based on BOID Conflict Resolution. Jan Broersen Mehdi Dastani Zisheng Huang Joris Hulstijn Leendert van der Torre Utrecht Universiteit Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam http://www.cs.vu.nl/~boid. Conflicts.

taffy
Download Presentation

An Alternative Classification of Agent Types based on BOID Conflict Resolution

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Alternative Classification of Agent Types based on BOID Conflict Resolution Jan Broersen Mehdi Dastani Zisheng Huang Joris Hulstijn Leendert van der Torre Utrecht Universiteit Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam http://www.cs.vu.nl/~boid

  2. Conflicts • Internal conflicts, e.g. between two desires • External conflicts, e.g.: • if you go to Amsterdam, then you believe that there are no cheap rooms close to the conference site • if you go to Amsterdam, then you are obliged to take a cheap room • if you go to Amsterdam, then you desire to stay close to the conference site • you intend to go to Amsterdam • Agent type based on conflicts resolution

  3. Layout of this Talk • BOID architecture • Conflicts and agent types • Agent architectures and agent types • Mapping agent types to agent architectures • Examples • Conclusion

  4. BDI (e.g. R&G and C&L) • Internal conflicts: axiomatizating each attitude • KD45 for beliefs; KD for desires and intentions • External conflicts: axiomatizating relations between attitudes • Static: realism Inta()  Bela() • Dynamic: commitment strategies A(Inta(A) U(Bela() Bela(E)))

  5. BDP (Thomason 2000) • Beliefs and desires are (Reiter) defaults • Internal conflicts are possible • { T  p , T p } leads to multiple extensions • In contrast to BDI: no modalities • Wishful thinking: • { T  rain , rain  wet , T wet}

  6. BOID architecture Goal selection Desires Sensor Beliefs Interpreter (Reasoner) Obligations Intentions Planning Effectors

  7. Conflicts and Agent Types • Realistic agent: beliefs override others • Social agent: obligations override desires • Selfish agent: desires override obligations • Simple-minded agent: intentions override obligations and desires (stable) • Open-minded agent: desires and obligations override intentions

  8. Social Simple Minded Agent Specialized Architecture 1 ( rb ) < ( ri ) < ( ro ) < ( rd ) Goals Obs. B I O D

  9. Super Selfish Agent Specialized Architecture 2 ( rb ) < ( rd ) < ( ri ) & ( rb ) < ( rd ) < ( ro ) I Goals Obs. B D O

  10. B<O , B<I , B<D B<O B<I B<D I<O B<O B<I B<D O<I B<O B<I B<D D<I B<O B<I B<D O<D B<O B<I B<D I<D B<O B<I B<D D<O B<O B<I B<D I<D I<O B<O B<I B<D O<I O<D B<O B<I B<D I<O D<O B<O B<I B<D O<I D<I B<O B<I B<D O<D I<D B<O B<I B<D D<I D<O BOXX BXXO BDXX BXXD BIXX BXXI B<O B<I B<D I<D I<O O<D B<O B<I B<D I<D I<O D<O B<O B<I B<D O<I O<D D<I B<O B<I B<D D<O D<I O<I B<O B<I B<D O<I O<D I<D B<O B<I B<D D<I D<O I<O BIOD BODI BDIO BDOI BIDO BOID 

  11. Realistic Agent General Architecture O Obs. Goals B I D

  12. Example 1 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r  I T  a D a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  13. Step 1 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r   I T  a D a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  14. Step 2 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r   I T  a {a} D a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  15. Step 3 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r {a}  I T  a {a} D a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  16. Step 4 Social Simple-minded Agent O B {a,r} a  r a  r  c a  c  r {a}  I T  a D a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  17. Step 5 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r {a,r} a  r  c a  c  r  I T  a D {a,r,c} a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  18. Step 6 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r  I T  a {a,r,c} D a  c {a,r,c} a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  19. Step 7 Social Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r {a,r,c}  I T  a D {a,r,c} a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  20. Example 2 Selfish Simple-minded Agent O B a  r a  r  c a  c  r {a,r,c}  I T  a D a  c a = going to Amsterdam r = cheap room c = close to conference site

  21. Conclusion • Benchmark examples for agent types • Norm, Conflicts, Agent types, Architectures • Small gap between architecture, logic and implementation by mapping conflicts into agent architecture Future Research • Extending architecture: planning and scheduling • Updating BOID rules • BOID verification and implementation http://www.cs.vu.nl/~boid

More Related