H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. Nunes, "On acting together," in Proceedings of AAAI-90. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1990, pp. 94--99.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

.... is executed when an organizer agent detects the need for joint action, becoming then the responsible for establishing the team and ensuring all member s commitments [13] Other general model for teamwork is STEAM (simply, a Shell for Teamwork) 25] STEAM is based in the joint intentions theory [14] but also on the SharedPlan theory [6,7] STEAM uses joint intentions as the basis for teamwork but team members also build up a hierarchical structure of joint intentions, individual intentions and beliefs about the teammates intentions [25] STEAM has been applied in several domains like the ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen and J. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Menlo Park, California, AAAI press, 1990

....spoken dialogue and the ability to track each other s actions in a shared environment. Prior work has laid the foundation for many of these capabilities in isolation, but no previous intelligent agents have integrated them to support such a team training environment. Models of teamwork [15, 16, 19, 32] address many of the issues in representing and reasoning about team tasks, but have not addressed the complex human interface issues that arise in hybrid human agent teams. Conversely, work in computational linguistics and embodied conversational agents [4, 17, 36] has addressed many of these ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94--99, Los Altos, CA, 1990. Morgan Kaufmann.

....Operational Semantics. 1 Preliminaries Understanding joint activity in multi agent societies is of critical importance for the very success of the paradigm of agent oriented computing. The notion of teamwork has been thus investigated by a number of researchers, notably by Cohen, Levesque et al. [4, 5, 17], by Grosz and Kraus [10] and by Kinny, Rao, Tidhar et al. [22, 23, 18, 27, 28, 29] Common to all three approaches that we mentioned is the focus on joint mental attitudes judged to be necessary for team formation and team action. Joint activity, however, includes all sorts of loose coalitions, ....

....with the capabilities that the agent in question believes other involved agents have. We refer to this testing as an integrity test for plans, and provide a proof system to check integrity of plans. Regarding the second point, we note that models of teamwork based on Joint Belief Desire Intention [4, 5, 17], or Shared Plans [10] do not show much concern for the various social roles played by members within a team (team leader, co workers, subordinate to superior, helper agent etc) In fact, with few exceptions [6, 26, 27, 28] social structure in teams of agents has by and large remained without ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Levesque, H. J., Cohen, P. R., Nunes, J. T. H., "On acting together", Proceedings of AAAI-90, Boston, Massachusetts, 1990.

....into sub components and separately plan each component, without requiring agreement on how the subcomponents are planned. At the next level of belief coordination, it is common to require the intended acts of the collaborative plan to be mutually intended [Grosz and Sidner, 1990; Traum, 1994; Levesque et el. 1990; Thomason, 1990b] At the highest level of belief coordination, the agents must both mutually intend all intentions and mutually believe any beliefs that support the plan such as the WARRANT beliefs that provide reasons for adopting a step of the plan. In addition, it is possible to require that ....

....model of collaborative planning dialogue presented here. In addition, since the testbed implementation is compatible with many current theories, these results could be easily incorporated into other dialogue planning algorithms [Logan et al. 1994; Traum, 1994; Guinn, 1994; Grosz and Sidner, 1990; Levesque et al. 1990; Grosz and Kraus, 1993; Chu Carrol and Carberry, 1995] inter alia. A secondary goal of this paper was to argue for a particular methodology for dialogue theory development. The method was specified in section 4.1. The Design World testbed was introduced in section 4 and sections 4.4 and 4.5 ....

Hector J. Levesque, Phillip R. Cohen, and Jose H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In AAAI90, 1990.

....afford. 3. COOPERATION FRAMEWORK Previous work has described a framework for cooperation based upon the notions of trust and motivation [10] Cooperation is more than simultaneous actions and individual intentions; agents need some form of commitment to the activity of cooperation itself [1, 14] along with an appropriate set of conventions [21] specifying when and how a commitment can be abandoned. Where a group More specifically, cooperation occurs only if any conflicts are resolved in favour of cooperation. Plan selection Intention adoption Group action Goals Figure 3: Stages of ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94--99, Boston, MA, 1990.

....to do b or to replace that intention with an intention to do g. This paper examines instances of intention reconciliation in which at least one of the conflicting intentions is related to an agent s commitment to a team plan. While much of the prior work on agent collaboration and negotiation [25, 27, 31] has assumed that commitments to collaborative activity are binding, we are interested in situations in which agents are allowed to renege occasionally on such commitments. For example, in the domain of automated systems administration (see [39] it might be reasonable to allow an agent committed ....

....the effect of environmental factors and the agents level of social consciousness, and by studying the outcomes of simulations using two different social commitment policies. This work with SPIRE brings two threads of research together, joining research on collaboration in multiagent systems [15, 16, 24, 27, 42] which has established that commitment to the joint activity is a defining characteristic of collaboration with research on rationality and resource bounded reasoning [8, 12, 21, 30, inter alia] which has established the need for agents to dynamically adapt their individual plans to ....

Levesque, H., Cohen, P. and Nunes, J. 1990. On acting together. In: Proc. of AAAI-90, pp. 94-99.

....here is that agents are logical reasoners. From the perspective of group activity, motivational attitudes are considered on three levels: individual, social (i.e. bilateral) and collective. Our goal is to arrive at an understanding of the notion of intention in groups of agents. We agree with [17] that: Joint intention by a team does not consist merely of simultaneous and coordinated individual actions; to act together, a team must be aware of and care about the status of the group e ort as a whole. There is a common agreement that intentions, and then commitments, play a number of ....

H.J. Levesque, P.R. Cohen, and J.H.T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings Eighth National Conference on AI (AAAI90), pages 94-99, Menlo Park (CA), Cambridge (MA), 1990. AAAI-Press and MIT Press.

....when they engage in teamwork activities. 1. INTRODUCTION Teamwork has been widely studied in the fields of Distributed AI [3, 10, 4, 5, 7, 15] Much success has been achieved in defining theoretical foundations for guiding agent cooperation and coordination in course of teamwork activities [15, 3, 9, 5] and in developing pragmatic framework for programming teamwork agents [11, 12] Numerous teamwork domains that often involve highly complex group activities have been explored in software simulation environment environment, such as RoboCup97 soccer games [10, 2, 11, 13] teamwork in military ....

H. J. Levesque and P. R. Cohen. On acting together. In Proceedings of AAAI-90, 1990.

....A team is a group in which the agents are restricted to having a common goal of some sort. Typically, team members cooperate and assist each other in achieving their common goal. Collective intention, as a specific joint mental attitude, is the central topic addressed in teamwork. We agree with [26] that: Joint intention by a team does not consist merely of simultaneous and coordinated individual actions; to act together, a team must be aware of and care about the status of the group effort as a whole. In fact, we assume that a team is constituted as soon as a collective intention is ....

....and there is a collective belief about this . Thus, their definition does not preclude cases of coercion and competition. Haddadi [21] gives an internal or prescriptive approach that characterizes the stages of CPS in a manner similar to [38] but is based on the semantics of [28] instead of [26]. She introduces the notions of pre commitments and commitments between pairs of agents and presents an extensive and well founded discussion of their properties, including important aspects like communication. However, in contrast to our approach, she does not go beyond the level of pairwise ....

Levesque, H., Cohen, P., Nunes, J.: On acting together, Proceedings Eighth National Conference on AI (AAAI90), AAAI-Press and MIT Press, Menlo Park (CA), Cambridge (MA), 1990.

.... of this mutual intention, that is, they have a collective belief about this (C BEL (M INT (g) C INT6( M INT6( A C BEL6(M INT6( In [11] we introduce a formal definition which is extensively discussed and compared with alternatives such as joint intention theory and SharedPlans the ory [17, 14,26]. Let us remark that, even though C INT( seems to be an infinite concept, collective intentions may be established in practice in a finite number of steps. On the other hand, it is easy to see that once a collective intention as defined above is established, agents are aware of it: Lemma 1. ....

....in terms of more basic atti tudes, as presented in this paper, may be combined with either choice, depending on the application. The definitions of collective commitments are not overloaded, and therefore easy to understand and to use. Some other approaches to collective commitments (see e.g. [17, 27]) introduce other aspects of collective attitudes, not treated here. For example, Wooldridge and Jennings consider triggers for commitment adop tion formulated as preconditions [27] If needed, these may be incorporated into our framework as well by adding an extra axiom. Note that in contrast to ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Levesque, P. Cohen, and J. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings Eighth National Conference on AI (AAAI90), pages 94-99, Menlo Pm'k (CA), Cambridge (MA), 1990. AAAI-Press and MIT Press.

.... logic has subsequently proved to be so useful for specifying and reasoning about the properties of agents that it has been used in an analysis of conflict and cooperation in multi agent dialogue [24] 23] as well as several studies in the theoretical foundations of cooperative problem solving [45, 38, 39]. This section will focus on the use of the logic in developing a theory of intention. The first step is to lay out the criteria that a theory of intention must satisfy. When building intelligent agents particularly agents that must interact with humans it is important that a rational balance is ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94 99, Boston, MA, 1990.

....of the aspects that allow humans to communicate. Philosophers and linguists have developed a formal model for human communication known as Speech Act Theory [17, 18] This model has served as a base for the development of languages that are oriented towards com munication in Multiagent Systems [19, 20, 21]. Interaction languages based on Speech Act Theory cap ture the essential characteristics of human communication and transport them to an adequate model for the development of artificial agents. The idea is to recognize all the internal aspects of an artificial autonomous entity, considering in ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, J. H. T. Nunes. On Acting Together, in Proceedings of the Eight National COnference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 94-99, 1990.

....in section 2.1, an agent is characterized face to the others by a private external description. Consequently, an agent must have a kind of data structure to store this information about the others. One can find in the literature several models of representation of the others, within a MAS context [18, 31]. As the theory upon which our work is based had already been formalized in [6] we have retained its basic elements regarding the representation an agent has about the others: their goals, actions and resources. Moreover, we have added to this representation the notion of plan, absent from this ....

....using his own plans, but he can t deduce the same fact using 3. Mutually Believed Mutual Dependence (MBMD) using his own plans, We are conscious that in our context, the meaning of the term mutually believed is somewhat different from the one usually used in MAS, like in [18]. For us, this term denotes the fact that the subject agent believes that the third agent on which he depends for a certain goal is also aware of their bilateral dependence relation. Moreover, he can deduce the same conclusion using s plans; 4. Locally Believed Reciprocal Dependence ....

Hector J. Levesque, Philip R. Cohen, and Jose H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the pages 94--99, Boston, August 1990. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

.... activity [8] Unfortunately, in implemented multiagent systems, team activities and the underlying model of teamwork is often not represented explicitly [6] The most popular theory on teams is that the team activity is achieved only if the agents have the joint intention towards that activity [7]. It focuses on a team that jointly intends a team action if the team members are jointly committed to completing the team action, while mutually believing they are doing it. To enter into a joint commitment, all team members must establish appropriate mutual beliefs and commitments. Thus the ....

H.J.Levesque, P.R.Cohen and J.H.T.Nunes. On Acting Together. In Proceedings of the 8 th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 94-100. San Mateo, California, 1990.

....and the robots can be heterogeneous. Therefore we will describe several team coordination frameworks which are based on the intentional cooperation model, after which their applicability in RoboCup will be discussed. 3.3. 1 Joint Intentions Theory Cohen and Levesque s joint intentions theory [13, 14, 39] is based on the notion that joint action by a group of agents is more than the union of the simultaneous individual actions, even if those actions are coordinated. It is an extension of their belief goal commitment model of mental states [12] in which intentions are specified as internal ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. T. H. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of AAAI-90, pages 94--99, 1990.

....address special coordination needs in case of agents forming explicit teams. Tambe argued that to obtain flexibility and reliability in teamwork, explicit teamwork modeling is required [11] His implemented teamwork model, STEAM, implements a hybrid of joint intentions [4] and SharedPlan theories [9]. In this work we suggest adding several coordination mechanisms, which implement some of the concepts introduced in STEAM, to GPGP. Some modifications of some of the GPGP standard mechanisms are also proposed. These extensions cause better synchronization between team members and reduce ....

H. Levesque and et al. On acting together. In AAAI-90, Boston, MA, 1991.

....systems. In particular, a theory that allows the designer to embed the design of intelligent agents and multi agents systems into the theory of organizational design. Finally, other research results in multi agent organizational design includes Self organization Design [31] and Teamwork Models [39]. Self organization Design is based on the idea to have an organization in which one or more members can monitor the organizational structure s e#ectiveness in directing organizational activities, design new organizational structures appropriate to new situation, evaluate possible organizations ....

....[55, 56, 57] propose a predictive model of Task Organization Performance, which, given a task, allows one to generate the possible organizations to solve the problem, and evaluate each organization. Teamwork models [58] based on the joint intentions framework introduced by Levesque et al. [39], allow to design multi agent systems in which individual agents are provided with an explicit representation of the team goals and plans, an underlying explicit model of team activity. 9. Conclusion We are working towards the definition of a collection of specific organizational architecture ....

H.J. Levesque, P.R. Cohen, and J. Nunes. On acting together. In Proc. of the National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park, USA, 1990.

....solving, which does involve communication. There are three basic phases of problem solving that an agent goes through. In practice, some of these phases may be skipped, revisited, etc. We are not trying to compete with formal models of agent behavior (e.g. Rao and George#, 1991; Cohen and Levesque, 1990]) However, for modeling collaboration, it is useful to have an abstraction for modeling other agents thought processes. 1. Determining Objectives: An agent determines which objectives it should adopt (intend) which it should focus on, and which it should no longer have. 2. Determining and ....

....which integrates a model of joint activity with an agent interaction model. Finally, we discuss some shortcomings in this area. Joint Activity Joint activity describes collaboration and action among agents. While much work has been done on formalizing joint activity and intention ( Searle, 1990; Levesque et al. 1990; Grosz and Kraus, 1996; Grosz and Kraus, 1999] the focus of this work has mostly been on formalization (an area in which our model is currently weak) and not on collaboration. We describe here several models of collaboration between agents: first, the SharedPlan theory and then, other models ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Levesque, P. Cohen, and J. Nunes, "On Acting Together," In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 94--99, Boston, July 29 -- August 3 1990. AAAI.

....group member intends that each group member holds some mental attitude. In the last few years much work has been done both in Distributed Artificial Intelligence (DAI) and in the philosophy of mind towards a principled representation of the mentalistic apparatus involved in collaborative activity [14, 20, 42, 54, 84]. Although most of this work agrees in arguing that a formalization of cooperation is grounded upon the formalization of the mental states of the involved agents, there is however no consensus about the connection between individual and joint mental attitudes. Various constraints on, and ....

....of the mental states of the involved agents, there is however no consensus about the connection between individual and joint mental attitudes. Various constraints on, and relationships between, individual and joint mental attitudes have been proposed. For example, while Levesque et al. [54] require the agents of a given group to hold that group s goals and intentions, Kinny et al. 51] require a group s goals and intentions to be distributed among the constituent agents on the basis of their skills and capabilities. Likewise, Cavedon et al. 21] require a joint attitude of a team to ....

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-90, pp. 94--99, 1990.

No context found.

Hector J. Levesque, Philip R. Cohen, and Jos e H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI, pages 94--99, 1990.

No context found.

Levesque, H. J., Cohen, P. R., and Nunes, J. H. T. On Acting Together. In Proceedings of AAAI-90, 94-99, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. Nunes, "On acting together," in Proceedings of AAAI-90. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1990, pp. 94--99.

No context found.

H.J. Levesque, P.R. Cohen, J. Nunes, On acting together, in: Proceedings of AAAI-90, Boston, MA, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1990, pp. 94--99.

No context found.

H. Levesque, P. Cohen, and J. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings Eighth National Conference on AI, pages 94--99. AAAI-Press and MIT Press, 1990.

No context found.

H.J. Levesque, P.R. Cohen, and J.H.T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI, pages 94--99, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes, "On acting together," in Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, MA, USA, 1990, pp. 94--99.

No context found.

Levesque, H.; Cohen, P.; and Nunes, J. 1990. On acting together. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), 94--99.

No context found.

H. Levesque, P.R.Cohen, and J.H.T.Nunes. On acting together. In AAAI, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. T. H. Nunes, On Acting Together, Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (1990).

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Arti cial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94-99, Boston, MA, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94--99, Boston, MA, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes, "On acting together," in Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, MA, USA, 1990, pp. 94--99.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 94--99, Boston, MA, 1990.

No context found.

Levesque, H. J., Cohen, P. R., & Nunes, J. (1990). On acting together. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 94--99. Menlo Park, Calif.: AAAI press.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94--99, Los Altos, CA, 1990. Morgan Kaufmann.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen and J. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Menlo Park, California, AAAI press, 1990

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of AAAI-90, pages 94--99, Boston, MA, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, J. H. T. Nunes. On Acting Together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-90, pp. 94--99, 1990.

No context found.

Levesque, H., Cohen, P., Nunes, J.: On acting together, Proceedings Eighth National Conference on AI (AAAI90), AAAI-Press and MIT Press, Menlo Park (CA), Cambridge (MA), 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, J. H. T. Nunes. On Acting Together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Arti cial Intelligence, AAAI-90, pp. 94-99, 1990.

No context found.

Levesque, H. J., P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes: 1990, `On Acting Together'. In: Proc. Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. pp. 94--99.

No context found.

H. Levesque, P. Cohen, and J. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 94--99, 1990.

No context found.

Levesque, H., Cohen, P., Nunes, J.: On acting together, Proceedings Eighth National Conference on AI (AAAI90), AAAI-Press and MIT Press, Menlo Park (CA), Cambridge (MA), 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunez. On Acting Together. In T. Dietterich and W. Swartout, editors, Proc. of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90). Boston, MA, USA., p. 94--99. AAAI Press, 1990.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, J. H. T. Nunes. On Acting Together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Arti cial Intelligence, AAAI-90, pp. 94-99, 1990.

No context found.

Levesque, H., Cohen, P. and Nunes, J. 1990. On acting together. In: Proc. of AAAI-90, pp. 94-99.

No context found.

Hector J. Levesque, Philip R. Cohen, and Jos'e H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 94--99, Boston, July 1990. 26

No context found.

H. Levesque, P. Cohen, and J. Nunes, \On Acting Together," In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Arti cial Intelligence, pages 94-99, Boston, July 29 { August 3 1990. AAAI.

No context found.

Levesque, H. J.; Cohen, P. R.; and Nunes, J. T.; 1990. On acting together. In AAAI.

No context found.

H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes. On acting together. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 94--99, Boston, MA, 1990.

First 50 documents  Next 50

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