F. Guerin, J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Procs. of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), 2001.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....like message passing. The older mentalistic approach (e.g. 6, 3] specifies the meaning of utterances by means of a description of the mental states of the respective agents (i.e. their beliefs and intentions, and thus indirectly their behaviour) while the more recent approaches (e.g. [1, 4]) try to determine communication from an objectivistic point of view, focussing on public rules. The former approach has two well known shortcomings, which eventually led to the development of the latter: At least in open multiagent systems, agents appear more or less as black boxes, which makes ....

.... of events caused by it [16, 15, 17] The currently most advanced approaches to ACL semantics determine this meaning as the result of a functional application of the respective speech act to the current discourse context, which has been derived as the outcome of the previous speech acts (e.g. [4]) The discourse context is thereby seen as a set of facts (e.g. about anaphora, roles and other social structures) which serve as parameters for the application of the speech acts, while the speech acts themselves function as a fixed mapping rule being statically assigned to the ACL words. Such ....

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), ACM Press, 2001.

....interaction. It is possible to view such work as an operational semantics for human language discourses, and thus analogous to the approach we have adopted here. Similar approaches for inter agent communications have been proposed recently by Munindar Singh [52] and Frank Guerin and Jeremy Pitt [15], building on speech act theory. These approaches di er from ours in two main respects. Firstly, they are models of generic dialogues, not speci cally purchase negotiations; they draw on typologies of generic locutions from speech act theory which would require speci c instantiation to be ....

....locutions from speech act theory which would require speci c instantiation to be suitable as protocols for negotiation dialogues between autonomous agents. A key objective of our work is the articulation of such a negotiation speci c protocol. Secondly, participating agents in the models of [15, 52] make public expression of their mental states, for example their beliefs, desires or intentions, relevant to the dialogue. These are called social commitments, and using them, locutions in the dialogue can be linked to the mental states of the participants, as in the computational linguistics ....

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational semantics for agent communication languages. In J. P. Muller, E. Andre, S. Sen, and C. Frasson, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pages 497-504, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM Press.

.... the criteria recently proposed for assessment of automated auction and negotiation mechanisms in, e.g. 31] theories of deliberative decisionmaking from argumentation theory [1, 15] and political theory [6, 10, 12] and recent studies of agent communications languages and interaction protocols [13, 20, 33, 36]. We believe our list of desiderata will be an initial step towards the development of formal design and assessment criteria for agent argumentation protocols. 2. PROPOSED DESIDERATA We begin by assuming that agents engaged in dialogues are autonomous, willing and free participants, able to ....

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational semantics for agent communication languages. In J. P. Muller, E. Andre, S. Sen, and C. Frasson, editors, Proc. 5th Intern. Conf. Autonomous Agents, pages 497--504, New York, 2001. ACM Press.

.... criteria recently proposed for assessment of automated auction and negotiation mechanisms in, e.g. 16, 28] theories of deliberative decisionmaking from argumentation theory [1, 13] and political science [4, 8, 10] and recent studies of agent communications languages and interaction protocols [11, 19, 30, 33]. We believe our list of desiderata will be an initial step towards the development of formal design and assessment criteria for agent argumentation protocols. 2. PROPOSED DESIDERATA We begin by assuming that agents engaged in dialogues are autonomous, willing and free participants, able to ....

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational semantics for agent communication languages. In J. P. Muller, E. Andre, S. Sen, and C. Frasson, editors, Proc. Fifth Intern. Conf. Autonomous Agents, pages 497--504, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM Press.

.... do not use argumentation, e.g. 4, 11] An important question is the extent to which such semantic mechanisms can ever be verified, since a sufficiently clever agent will always be able to simulate insincerely any semantic requirement [51] Recent work has proposed the use of a social semantics [19, 48], effectively public statements of private mental states such as beliefs and intentions, to ensure all participants assign the same meaning to syntactical statements. Of course, duplicitous agents will still be able to make false declarations of such social commitments. A third requirement will ....

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational semantics for agent communication languages. In J. P. Muller, E. Andre, S. Sen, and C. Frasson, editors, Proc. 5th Intern. Conf. on Autonomous Agents, pages 497--504, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM Press.

....interaction. It is possible to view such work as an operational semantics for human language discourses, and thus analogous to the approach we have adopted here. Similar approaches for inter agent communications have been proposed recently by Munindar Singh [52] and Frank Guerin and Jeremy Pitt [15], building on speechact theory. These approaches differ from ours in two main respects. Firstly, they are models of generic dialogues, not specifically purchase negotiations; they draw on typologies of generic locutions from speech act theory which would require specific instantiation to be ....

....locutions from speech act theory which would require specific instantiation to be suitable as protocols for negotiation dialogues between autonomous agents. A key objective of our work is the articulation of such a negotiation specific protocol. Secondly, participating agents in the models of [15, 52] make public expression of their mental states, for example their beliefs, desires or intentions, relevant to the dialogue. These are called social commitments, and using them, locutions in the dialogue can be linked to the mental states of the participants, as in the computational linguistics ....

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational semantics for agent communication languages. In J. P. Muller, E. Andre, S. Sen, and C. Frasson, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pages 497--504, New York, NY, USA, 2001. ACM Press.

No context found.

F. Guerin, J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Procs. of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), 2001.

No context found.

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Procs. Agents'01, ACM Press, 2001.

No context found.

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), pages 497--504. ACM Press, 2001.

No context found.

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Procs. Agents'01, ACM Press, 2001.

No context found.

F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), pages 497--504. ACM Press, 2001.

No context found.

F. Guerin, J. Pitt. Denotational Semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In Procs. of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'01), 2001.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC