Programming Cognitive Agents

(Invited Talk)
  • John-Jules Ch. Meyer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3550)


Although there is a lot of theory around about cognitive agents since the seminal work by researchers such as Bratman, Cohen & Levesque and Rao & Georgeff practice of programming ’truly’ cognitive agents is still in its infancy. Of course, several architectures have been proposed and even occasionally been implemented, and there is a prospect of many potential applications of agent-based systems, but is there a truly systematic way of programming agents with cognitive / mental attitudes such beliefs, desires, intentions, goals, plans, commitments, emotions...? We believe that for this dedicated agent-oriented languages are needed. A number of these have been developed in the last decade or so. But programming in them is still hard. Is there a methodology for agent-oriented programming? Can one structure agent programs better making use of cognitive notions? And how to verify that an agent program is correct? And how is this combined with programming multi-agent systems and agent societies where coordination of these autonomous agents and more generally social notions such as norms seem most important? In this paper a number of the issues related to programming cognitive (multi) agents will be discussed on the basis of work done in Utrecht around the agent language 3APL.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Aldewereld, H., Vázquez-Salceda, J., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Verifying Norm Compliancy of Protocols. In: To appear in Proc. ANI@REM 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Bakker, J.W.: Mathematical Theory of Program Correctness. Prentice-Hall International, London (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergenti, F., Gleizes, M.-P., Zambonelli, F. (eds.): Methodologies and Software Engineering for Agent Systems. The Agent-Oriented Software Engineering Handbook. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Boer, F.S., de Vries, W., Meyer, J.-J.C., van Eijk, R.M., van der Hoek, W.: Process Algebra and Constraint Programming for Modeling Interactions in MAS. In: To appear in Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computing (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M., Dix, J., El Fallah Seghrouchni, A. (eds.): Multi-Agent Programming. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brachman, R., Lemnios, Z.: DARPA’s New Cogitive Systems Vision,
  7. 7.
    Bratman, M.E.: Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts (1987)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bratman, M.E., Israel, D., Pollack, M.: Plans and Resource-Bounded Practical Reasoning. J. of Computational Intelligence 4(4), 349–355 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Castro, J., Kolp, W., Mylopoulos, J.: Towards Requirements-driven Information Systems Engineering: the TROPOS project. Information Systems 27, 365–389 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Intention is Choice with Commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42(3), 213–261 (1990)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damasio, A.R.: Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Grosset / Putnam Press, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dastani, M., Hulstijn, J., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Issues in Multiagent System Development. In: Jennings, N.R., Sierra, C., Sonenberg, L., Tambe, M. (eds.) Proc. 3rd Int. Joint Conf. On Autonomous Agents & Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS 2004), pp. 922–992. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dastani, M., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C.: A Programming Language for Cognitive Agents: Goal-Directed 3APL. In: Dastani, M.M., Dix, J., El Fallah-Seghrouchni, A. (eds.) PROMAS 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3067, pp. 111–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dastani, M., van Riemsdijk, M.B., Hulstijn, J., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Enacting and Deacting Roles in Agent Programming. In: Odell, J.J., Giorgini, P., Müller, J.P. (eds.) AOSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3382, pp. 189–204. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van Diggelen, J., Beun, R.J., Dignum, F., van Eijk, R.M., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Optimal Communication Vocabularies and Heterogeneous Ontologies. In: van Eijk, R.M., Huget, M.-P., Dignum, F.P.M. (eds.) AC 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3396, pp. 76–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Diggelen, J., Beun, R.J., Dignum, F., van Eijk, R., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Communication under Construction: Three Protocols for Lazy Ontology Alignment. In: Accepted for AMKM 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van Diggelen, J., Beun, R.J., Dignum, F., van Eijk, R., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Combining Normal Communication with Ontology Allignment. In: Accepted for AC 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dignum, V.: A Model for Organizational Interaction (Based on Agents, Founded in Logic), Ph.D. Thesis. Utrecht University, Utrecht (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Esteva, M., Padget, J., Sierra, C.: Formalizing a Language for Institutions and Norms. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) ATAL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2333, pp. 348–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fisher, M.: A Survey of Concurrent METATEM – The language and Its Applications. In: Gabbay, D.M., Ohlbach, H.J. (eds.) ICTL 1994. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 827, pp. 480–505. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frijda, N.: The Emotions. Cambridge University Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    de Giacomo, G., Lespérance, Y., Levesque, H.: ConGolog, a Concurrent Programming Language Based on the Situation Calculus. Artificial Intelligence 121(1,2), 109–169 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gmytrasiewicz, P.J., Lisetti, C.L.: Emotions and Personality in Agent Design and Modeling. In: Meyer, J.-J.C., Tambe, M. (eds.) ATAL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2333, pp. 21–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grossi, D., Meyer, J.-J.C., Dignum, F.: Modal Logic Investigations in the Semantics of Counts-as. In: Accepted for ICAIL 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hindriks, K.V., de Boer, F.S., van der Hoek, W., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Agent Programming in 3APL. Int. J. of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2(4), 357–401 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    van der Hoek, W., van Linder, B., Meyer, J.-J.C.: An Integrated Modal Approach to Rational Agents. In: Wooldridge, M., Rao, A. (eds.) Foundations of Rational Agency. Applied Logic Series, vol. 14, pp. 133–168. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jonker, G., Meyer, J.-J.C., Dignum, F.: A Market Mechanism for Airport Traffic Planning. In: Ghidini, C., Giorgini, P., van der Hoek, W. (eds.) Proc. EUMAS 2004, Barcelona, pp. 365–375 (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Koch, F., Meyer, J.-J.C., Dignum, F., Rahwan, I.: Programming Deliberative Agents for Mobile Services: The 3APL-M Platform. In: Accepted for ProMAS 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lebbink, H.-J., Witteman, C., Meyer, J.-J.C.: A Dialogue Game Approach to Multi- Agent System Programming. In: Verbrugge, R., Taatgen, N., Schomaker, L. (eds.) Proc. 16th Belgium-Netherlands Conf., on Artif. Intell (BNAIC-2004), pp. 251–258. Univ. of Groningen (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lebbink, H.-J., Witteman, C., Meyer, J.-J.C.: A Dialogue Game to Offer an Agreement to Disagree. In: Bordini, R.H., Dastani, M.M., Dix, J., El Fallah Seghrouchni, A. (eds.) PROMAS 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3346, pp. 199–223. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Meyer, J.-J.C.: Reasoning about Emotional Agents. In: López de Mántaras, R., Saitta, L. (eds.) Proc.16th European Conf. on Artif. Intell (ECAI 2004), pp. 129–133. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Müller, J.P.: The Design of Intelligent Agents: A Layered Approach. Springer, Berlin (1996)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Oatley, K., Jenkins, J.M.: Understanding Emotions. Blackwell Publishing, Malden (1996)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ortony, A., Clore, G.L., Collins, A.: The Cognitive Structure of Emotions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Picard, R.W.: Does HAL cry digital tears? Emotion and Computers. In: Stork, D.G. (ed.) HAL’s Legacy, ch. 13. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rao, A.S.: AgentSpeak(L): BDI Agents Speak Out in a Logical Computable Language. In: Perram, J., Van de Velde, W. (eds.) MAAMAW 1996. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1038, pp. 42–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In: Allen, J., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1991), pp. 473–484. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    van der Ree, R.: Emotions in the Agent Language 3APL (working title), Master’s Thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht (to appear)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., de Boer, F.S., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Dynamic Logic for Plan Revision in Intelligent Agents. In: Leite, J., Torroni, P. (eds.) Pre-Proceedings CLIMA V (5th Int. Workshop on Computaional Logic in Multi-Agent Systems), Lisbon, Portugal, September 29-30, pp. 196–211 (2004) (to appear in post-proceedings)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dastani, M., Dignum, F., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Dynamics of Declarative Goals in Agent Programming. In: Leite, J., Omicini, A., Torroni, P., Yolum, P. (eds.) Proc. DALT 2004, AAMAS 2004, New York, pp. 17–32 (2004) (to appear in post-proceedings)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dastani, M., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Semantics of Declarative Goals in Agent Programming. In: Accepted for AAMAS 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Dastani, M., Meyer, J.-J.C.: Subgoal Semantics in Agent Programming (submitted)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    van Riemsdijk, M.B., Meyer, J.-J.C., de Boer, F.S.: Semantics of Plan Revision in Intelligent Agents. In: Rattray, C., Maharaj, S., Shankland, C. (eds.) AMAST 2004. LNCS, vol. 3116, pp. 426–442. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shoham, Y.: Agent-Oriented Programming. Artificial Intelligence 60(1), 51–92 (1993)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sloman, A.: Damasio, Descartes, Alarms, and Meta-Management. In: Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC 1998), pp. 2652–2657. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wooldridge, M.J.: Reasoning about Rational Agents. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wooldridge, M.J., Ciancarini, P.: Agent-Oriented Software Engineering: The State of the Art. In: Ciancarini, P., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) AOSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1957, pp. 1–28. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wooldridge, M.J., Jennings, N.R., Kinny, D.: The Gaia Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analysis and Design. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 3(3), 285–312 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • John-Jules Ch. Meyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations