Advertisement

Socionics pp 263-288 | Cite as

Multiagent Systems Without Agents — Mirror-Holons for the Compilation and Enactment of Communication Structures

  • Matthias Nickles
  • Gerhard Weiß
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3413)

Abstract

It is widely accepted in Distributed Artificial Intelligence that a crucial property of artificial agents is their autonomy. Whereas agent autonomy enables features of agent-based applications like flexibility, robustness and emergence of novel solutions, autonomy might be also the reason for undesired or even chaotic agent behavior, and unmanageable system complexity. As a conceptual approach to the solution for this “autonomy dilemma” of agent-based software engineering, this work introduces the HolOMAS framework for open multiagent systems based on special meta-agents, so-called Mirror-Holons. Instead of restricting agent autonomy by means of normative constraints and defined organizational structures as usual, Mirror-Holons allow for the gradual uncoupling of agent interaction and emergent system functionality. Their main purpose is the derivation and adaption of social structure knowledge and evolving stochastical social programs from the observation and compilation of agent communication and additional design objectives. Social programs can either be executed by the Mirror-Holons themselves, or communicated to the agents and the system designer, similar to the functionality of mass media like television or newspapers in human societies.

Keywords

Multiagent Systems Holons Agent Communication Cybernetics Artificial Sociality Autonomous Computing Multiagent Coordination Media 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Singh, M.P.: A social semantics for agent communication languages. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Agent Communication Languages (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Luhmann, N.: Social Systems. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Labrou, Y., Finin, T.: Semantics and conversations for an agent communication language. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 1997 (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schillo, M., Spresny, D.: Organization: The Central Concept of Qualitative and Quantitative Scalability. In: Fischer, K., Florian, M., Malsch, T. (eds.) Socionics. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3413, pp. 84–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guerin, F., Pitt, J.: Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents 2001). ACM Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Communicative actions for artificial agents. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiagent Systems, ICMAS 1995 (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Singh, M.P.: Multiagent Systems as Spheres of Commitment. In: Proceedings of the ICMAS Workshop on Norms, Obligations, and Conventions (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lorentzen, K.F., Nickles, M.: Ordnung aus Chaos – Prolegomena zu einer Luhmann’schen Modellierung deentropisierender Strukturbildung in Multiagentensystemen. In: Kron, T. (ed.) Luhmann modelliert. Ansätze zur Simulation von Kommunikationssystemen, Leske & Budrich (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brauer, W., Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Weiß, G., Lorentzen, K.F.: Expectation-Oriented Analysis and Design. In: Wooldridge, M.J., Weiß, G., Ciancarini, P. (eds.) AOSE 2001. LNCS, vol. 2222. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nickles, M., Weiss, G.: Empirical Semantics of Agent Communication in Open Systems. In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Challenges in Open Agent Environments, AAMAS 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Weiss, G.: Empirical-Rational Semantics of Agent Communication. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Weiß, G.: Expectation-Oriented Modeling. International Journal “Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence” (EAAI) (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nickles, M., Froehner, T.: Social Reification for the Semantic Web. Research Report FKI-24x-04, AI/Cognition Group, Department of Informatics, Technical University Munich (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Froehner, T., Nickles, M., Weiß, G.: Towards Modeling the Social Layer of Emergent Knowledge Using Open Ontologies. In: Proceedings of The ECAI 2004 Workshop on Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management, AMKM 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Froehner, T., Nickles, M., Weiß, G.: Open Ontologies—The Need for Modeling Heterogeneous Knowledge. In: Proceedings of The 2004 International Conference on Information and Knowledge Engineering, IKE 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rovatsos, M., Weiß, G., Wolf, M.: An Approach to the Analysis and Design of Multiagent Systems based on Interaction Frames. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Schmitt, M., Brauer, W., Fischer, F., Malsch, T., Paetow, K., Weiss, G.: The Empirical Semantics Approach to Communication Structure Learning and Usage: Individuals- vs. System-Views. In: Gilbert, N. (ed.) Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, JASSS, Issue on Socionics (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Weiß, G.: A Schema for Specifying Computational Autonomy. In: Petta, P., Tolksdorf, R., Zambonelli, F. (eds.) ESAW 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2577. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nickles, M., Rovatsos, M., Brauer, W., Weiss, G.: Communication Systems: A Unified Model of Socially Intelligent Systems. In: Fischer, K., Florian, M., Malsch, T. (eds.) Socionics. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3413, pp. 289–313. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Genesereth, M.R., Fikes, R.E.: Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Stanford University (1992)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Austin, J.L.: How to do things with words. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1962)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Searle, J.R.: A taxonomy of illocutionary acts. In: Gunderson, K. (ed.) Language, Mind, and Knowledge (Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science VII), pp. 344–369. University of Minnesota Press (1975)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Colombetti, M., Verdicchio, M.: An analysis of agent speech acts as institutional actions. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gerber, C., Siekmann, J., Vierke, G.: Flexible Autonomy in Holonic Multiagent Systems. In: AAAI Spring Symposium on Agents with Adjustable Autonomy (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Omicini, A., Denti, E.: Formal ReSpecT. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 48, Declarative Programming—Selected Papers from AGP 2000. Elsevier Science B.V, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dieng, R., Mueller, H.J. (eds.): Conflicts in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koestler, A.: The Ghost in the Machine. Arkana (1967)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heylighen, F., Joslyn, C.: Second Order Cybernetics. In: Heylighen, F., Joslyn, C., Turchin, V. (eds.) Principia Cybernetica (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ripley, B.D.: Stochastic Simulation. Wiley, Chichester (1987)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthias Nickles
    • 1
  • Gerhard Weiß
    • 1
  1. 1.AI/Cognition Group, Department of InformaticsTechnical University of MunichGarching bei MünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations