Socionics pp 36-50 | Cite as

Sociological Foundation of the Holonic Approach Using Habitus-Field-Theory to Improve Multiagent Systems

  • Frank Hillebrandt
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3413)


In this paper, I discuss the most important aspects of a sociological foundation of holonic multiagent systems. Pierre Bourdieu’s habitus-field-theory forms the sociological basis for my arguments. With this theory I would like to consider the special quality of holons as autonomous and self-organising social entities with clear distinction to the simple coordination of social interactions. Holons are viewed as organisational fields, which are both “autonomous social fields” and “corporate agents”. To clarify the advantages of this approach, I introduce a matrix of mechanisms using delegation (task delegation and social delegation) as a central concept to define organisational relationships in task-assignment multiagent systems. Using the matrix of delegation as basic building block, I propose a new dimension of emergent system behaviour in a holonic multiagent system which allows new, qualitative forms of scalability in complex systems of distributed artificial intelligence.


Multiagent System Symbolic Capital Social Entity Social Delegation Gift Exchange 
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.
    Gerber, C.: Self-Adaptation and Scalability in Multiagent Societies. PhD thesis, Computer Science Department, Universität Saarbrücken (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gerber, C., Siekmann, J., Vierke, G.: Holonic Multi-Agent Systems. Technical Report RR-99-03, German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI), Saarbrücken, Germany (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gerber, C., Siekmann, J., Vierke, G.: Flexible Autonomy in Holonic Multiagent Systems. In: AAAI Spring Symposium on Agents with Adjustable Autonomy (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fischer, K.: Agent-Based Design of Holonic Manufacturing Systems. Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems 27, 3–13 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ulieru, M., Walker, S., Brennan, B.: Holonic Enterprise as a Collaborative Information Ecosystem. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Holons: Autonomous and Cooperating Agents for Industry, Autonomous Agents 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ulieru, M.: Emergence of Holonic Enterprises from Multi-Agent Systems: A Fuzzy Evolutionary Approach. In: Soft Computing Agents. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koestler, A.: The Ghost in the Machine. Hutchinson & Co, London (1967)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jennings, N.: Agent-based Computing: Promise and Perils. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1999), pp. 1429–1436 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weiß, G.: Prolog. In: Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1–23. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schillo, M.: Self-Organization and Adjustable Autonomy: Two Sides of the Same Medal. In: Hexmoor, H., Falcone, R., eds.: Proceedings of the AAAI 2002 Workshop on Autonomy, Delegation, and Control: From Inter-agent to Groups (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schillo, M., Zinnikus, I., Fischer, K.: Towards a Theory of Flexible Holons: Modelling Institutions for Making Multiagent Systems Robust. In: 2nd Workshop on Norms and Institutions in MAS (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Hare, G.M.P., Jennings, N.R.: Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castelfranchi, C.: Engineering Social Order. In: Omicini, A., Tolksdorf, R., Zambonelli, F. (eds.) ESAW 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1972, pp. 1–18. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macy, M.W., Willer, R.: From Factors to Actors: Computational Sociology and Agent-Based Modeling. Annual Reviews of Sociology 28, 143–166 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sawyer, R.K.: Artificial Societies: Multiagent Systems and Micro-Macro Link in Sociological Theory. Sociological Methods and Research 31, 325–363 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huhns, M.N., Stephens, L.M.: Multiagent Systems and Societies of Agents. In: Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, p. 79. MIT Press, Boston (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weiß, G.: Adaptation and Learning in Multi-agent Systems: Some Remarks and a Bibliography. In: Adaptation and Learning in Multi-agent Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schillo, M., Fischer, K., Fley, B., Florian, M., Hillebrandt, F., Spresny, D.: FORM - A Sociologically Founded Framework for Designing Self-Organization of Multiagent Systems. In: Lindemann, G., Moldt, D., Paolucci, M. (eds.) RASTA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2934, pp. 156–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gasser, L.: Social Conceptions of Knowledge and Action: DAI Foundations and Open Systems Semantics. In: Readings in Agents, pp. 389–404. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schillo, M., Bürckert, H.J., Fischer, K., Klusch, M.: Towards a Definition of Robustness for Market-Style Open Multi-Agent Systems. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents (AA 2001), pp. 75–76. ACM Press, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carley, K.M., Prietula, M.J., Lin, Z.: Design Versus Cognition: The interaction of agent cognition and organizational design on organizational performance. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 1 (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lesser, V.R.: Cooperative Multiagent Systems. A Personal View of the State of the Art. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engeneering 11 (1999)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dederichs, A.M., Florian, M.: Organisationen und Akteure – eine organisationssoziologische Skizze. In: Bourdieus Theorie der Praxis. Erklärungskraft - Anwendung – Perspektiven, pp. 69–96. Opladen, Wiesbaden (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bourdieu, P., Wacquant, L.: An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Polity Press, Chicago (1992)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bourdieu, P.: Pascalian Meditations. Polity Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bourdieu, P.: In Other Words. Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology. Polity Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schillo, M., Fischer, K., Hillebrandt, F., Florian, M., Dederichs, A.: Bounded Social Rationality: Modelling self-organization and adaptation using habitus-field theory. In: Jonker, C., Lindemann, G., Leita, I., Uthmann, T., eds.: Proceedings of the Workshop on Modelling Artificial Societies and Hybrid Organizations (MASHO) at ECAI 2000. 112–122 (2000)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Towards a theory of delegation for agent-based systems. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 24, 141–157 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Panzarasa, P., Jennings, N.R.: The Organisation of Sociality: AManifesto for a New Science of Multi-agent Systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th Workshop on Mulit-agent systems, MAAMAW 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Carley, K.M., Gasser, L.: Computational Organization Theory. In: Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, pp. 299–330. MIT Press, Cambridge(1999)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bourdieu, P.: Delegation and Political Fetishism. Thesis Eleven 10/11 56–70 (1984/1985)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Hillebrandt
    • 1
  1. 1.Arbeitsbereich Technikbewertung und TechnikgestaltungTechnische Universität Hamburg-HarburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations