Autonomous Agents and Multi –agent Systems (AAMAS) for the Military – Issues and Challenges

  • Patrick Beautement
  • David Allsopp
  • Mark Greaves
  • Steve Goldsmith
  • Shannon Spires
  • Simon G. Thompson
  • Helge Janicke
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3890)


The military domain is a very challenging environment and human endeavour in this domain is characterized by uncertainty and the need to be able to deal with significant and disruptive dynamic changes. In addition, activities are driven by human decision-makers who need support in making sense of the environment and with reasoning about, and effecting, possible futures. Hence, various unique factors need to be taken into account when considering the provision of applications, tools, devices and infrastructure for the military domain. This paper will itemize and discuss some of these factors in the context of autonomous agents and multi-agent systems. This paper is a desiderata for the research space.


Autonomous Agent Mobile Agent System Military Context Military Environment Adaptive Resource Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alberts, D.S., Hayes, R.E.: Power To the Edge. Command... Control... in the Information Age. In: CCRP (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allsopp, D.N., Beautement, P., Bradshaw, J.M., Durfee, E.H., Kirton, M., Knoblock, C.A., Suri, N., Tate, A., Thompson, C.Q.: Coalition Agents Experiment: Multiagent Cooperation in International Coalitions. IEEE Intelligent Systems (May/June 2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Atighetchi, M., Pal, P., Webber, F., Schantz, R., Jones, C., Loyall, J.: Adaptive Cyberdefense for Survival and Intrusion Tolerance. IEEE Internet Computing 8(6), 25–33 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bradshaw, J.M., Beautement, P., Breedy, M.R., Bunch, L., Drakunov, S.V., Feltovich, P., Hoffman, R.R., Jeffers, R., Johnson, M., Kulkarni, S., Lott, J., Raj, A.K., Suri, N., Uszok, A.: Making Agents Acceptable to People. In: Zhong, N., Liu, J. (eds.) Handbook of Intelligent Information Technology. IOS Press / Springer, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bates, J.C.: UltraLog: Securing Logistics Information on the Battlefield. Army Logistician 37(2) (March-April 2005); U.S. Government Printing Office ISSN 0004-2528 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gorodetski, V., Kotenko, I.: The Multi-agent Systems for Computer Network Security Assurance: Frameworks and Case Studies. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Systems (ICAIS 2002), Geelong, Australia, February 12-15 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hasard, Written answers (Hoon) Debate of The United Kingdom Parliament (May 15, 2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoile, C., Wang, F., Bonsma, E., Marrow, P.: Core Specification and Experiments in DIET: A Decentralised Ecosystem-inspired Mobile Agent System. In: Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W.L. (eds.) Proceedings of First International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Bologna, Italy, July 15-19, pp. 623–630 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., Kirsh, D.: Distributed cognition: Toward a new Foundation for Human-computer Interaction Research. University of California, San Diego (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Helsinger, Wright, T.: Cougaar: A Robust Configurable Multi-Agent Platform. Submitted to IEEE Aerospace Conference 2005, BBN Technologies, Cambridge MA (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.J.: Applications of Intelligent Agents. In: Jennings, N.R., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) Agent Technology Foundations, Applications and Markets. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pynasath, D.V., Tambe, M.: An Automated Teamwork Infrastructure for Hetrogeneous Software Agents and Humans. JAAMAS (Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi- Agent Systems) 7, 71–100 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kotenko: Active Vulnerability Assessment of Computer Networks by Simulation of Complex Remote Attacks. In: Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Computer Networks and Mobile Computing (ICCNMC 2003) Shanghai, China, October 20-23 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sandhana, L.: The Drone Armies are Coming. Wired News (August 30, 2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Potok, T.E., Phillips, L., Pollock, R., Loebl, A., Sheldon, F.T.: Suitability of Agent Technology for Command and Control in Fault-tolerant, Safety-critical Responsive Decision Networks. In: Proc.16th Int’l Conf. Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems, Reno NV, August 13-15 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shadbolt, N., Ciravegna, F., Domingue, J., Hall, W., Motta, E., O’Hara, K., Robertson, D., Sleemean, D., Tate, A., Wilks, Y.: Advanced Knowledge Technologies at the Midterm: Tools and Methods for the Semantic Web. In: Shadbolt, N., O’Hara, K. (eds.) Advanced Knowledge Technologies, Selected Papers 2004, AKT, UK (2004) ISBN 85432 8122Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Talbot, D.: How Technology Failed in Iraq. MIT Technology Review (November 2004),
  18. 18.
    Wang, F., Gong, F., Sargor, C., Goseva-Popsto janova, K., Trivedi, K., Jou, F.: SITAR: A Scalable Intrusion-Tolerant Architecture for Distributed Services. In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security T1B3 1100 United States Military Academy, West Point, NY, June 5-6 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Beautement
    • 1
  • David Allsopp
    • 1
  • Mark Greaves
    • 2
  • Steve Goldsmith
    • 3
  • Shannon Spires
    • 3
  • Simon G. Thompson
    • 4
  • Helge Janicke
    • 5
  1. 1.QinetiQ LtdUK
  2. 2.VulcanUSA
  3. 3.Sandia National LabsUSA
  4. 4.BTUK
  5. 5.DMUUK

Personalised recommendations