An executable specification of an argumentation protocol

Abstract

Open multi-agent computational systems are composed of heterogeneous and possibly antagonistic software entities. Characteristic features are limited trust and unpredictable behaviour. Members of such systems may fail to, or even choose not to, conform to the norms governing their interactions. It has been argued that systems of this type should have a formal, declarative, verifiable, and meaningful semantics. We present a theoretical and computational framework being developed for the executable specification of such systems. We adopt an external perspective and view open computational systems as instances of normative systems. In this paper we demonstrate how the framework can be applied to specifying and executing an argumentation protocol based on Brewka's reconstruction of Rescher's theory of formal disputation. The specification is formalised in the action language C + and executed using the 'Causal Calculator' (Ccalc) implementation.

Specifying and Analysing Agent-Based Social Institutions Using Answer Set Programming

“…The types of specification we describe are closely related to the work of Artikis et al described in [1][2][3]21] from which we derive much of our specification model. In their work specifications of social systems are formalised in both the event calculus [22] and using a subset of the action language · [12].…”

Answer Set Programming for Representing and Reasoning About Virtual Institutions

“…The institutional model is depicted in Figure 1. (1) shows that a country can observe a shooting, that either party has started the war or declared a truce, that the citizenry have been called up and that a country has been provoked, while the institution as a whole can acknowledge that conscription has taken place and somebody has been murdered, as stated by (2). (3) indicates all the violations that could occur.…”

“…-ASP allows a wider variety of queries than is typically provided in EC implementations but space constraints do not allow the full illustration of this aspect here. Artikis et al in [1,2,3,30] describe a system for the specification of normative social systems in terms of power, empowerment and obligation. This is formalized using both the event calculus [31] and a subset of the action language · [25].…”

“…The earliest presentation in the computer science literature is perhaps Noriega's thesis [35], followed by Rodriguez [37] and Vazquez-Salceda [38]. Alongside, there have been several attempts at finding tractable representations of institutional norms, starting from the original FishMarket paper [36] using automata [22], process algebra [29], symbolic model-checking with temporal logics [11], commitments [39], social institutions [41] action languages [2] and answer set programming [10]. Initial approaches were bottom-up, starting from protocols, but to date creating a verifiable relationship between protocols and higher level representations of norms has not proven fruitful.…”

Peer Pressure as a Driver of Adaptation in Agent Societies

“…elections and voting protocols) [4,5] -Rules of Social Order -Where the system characterises the permissions, obligations and (institutional) powers of each agent (eg. rights to system resources) [1,5,6] We start from a scenario with multiple agents providing/consuming resources to/from a central repository. However, the set of resources requested is more than those available for distribution, so we define a set of social constraints which determine which agent is allocated resources.…”