Norm-regulated Transition System Situations

Magnus Hjelmblom

Abstract

Many multi-agent systems (MAS) and other kinds of dynamic systems may be modeled as transition systems, in which actions are associated with transitions between di¤erent system states. This paper presents an approach to normative systems in this context, in which the permission or prohibition of actions is related to the permission or prohibition of di¤erent types of state transitions with respect to some condition d on a number of agents in a state. It introduces the notion of a norm-regulated transition system situation, which is intended to represent a single step in the run of a (norm-regulated) transition system. The normative framework uses an algebraic representation of conditional norms and is based on a systematic exploration of the possible types of state transitions with respect to d. A general-level Java/Prolog framework for norm-regulated transition system situations is currently being developed.

References

  1. Cliffe, O., De Vos, M., and Padget, J. (2007). Answer set programming for representing and reasoning about virtual institutions. In Inoue, K., Satoh, K., and Toni, F., editors, Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems, volume 4371 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 60-79. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-69619-3 4.
  2. Combettes, S., Hanachi, C., and Sibertin-Blanc, C. (2006). Organizational petri nets for protocol design and enactment. In Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, AAMAS 7806, pages 1384-1386, New York, NY, USA. ACM. doi:10.1145/1160633.1160892.
  3. Craven, R. and Sergot, M. (2008). Agent strands in the action language nC+. Journal of Applied Logic, 6(2):172-191. Selected papers from the 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science.
  4. Gaertner, D., Clark, K., and Sergot, M. (2007). Ballroom etiquette: a case study for norm-governed multi-agent systems. In Noriega, P., Vzquez-Salceda, J., Boella, G., Boissier, O., Dignum, V., Fornara, N., and Matson, E., editors, Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems II, volume 4386 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 212-226.
  5. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540- 74459-7 14.
  6. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2005). Temporalised normative positions in defeasible logic. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, ICAIL 7805, pages 25-34, New York, NY, USA. ACM. doi:10.1145/1165485.1165490.
  7. Hjelmblom, M. (2008). Deontic action-logic multi-agent systems in Prolog. Technical Report 30, University of Gävle, Division of Computer Science.
  8. Hjelmblom, M. (2011). State transitions and normative positions within normative systems. Technical Report 37, University of Gävle, Department of Industrial Development, IT and Land Management.
  9. Hjelmblom, M. and Odelstad, J. (2009). jDALMAS: A Java/Prolog framework for deontic action-logic multiagent systems. In Ha°kansson, A., Nguyen, N., Hartung, R., Howlett, R., and Jain, L., editors, Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, volume 5559 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 110-119. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01665-3 12.
  10. Laaksolahti, J. and Boman, M. (2002). Anticipatory guidance of plot. CoRR, cs.AI/0206041. doi:10.1007/978- 3-540-45002-3 14.
  11. Lindahl, L. (1977). Position and change: a study in law and logic. Synthese library. D. Reidel Pub. Co.
  12. Lindahl, L. and Odelstad, J. (2003). Normative systems and their revision: An algebraic approach. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 11:81-104. doi:10.1023/B:ARTI.0000046005.10529.47.
  13. Lindahl, L. and Odelstad, J. (2004). Normative positions within an algebraic approach to normative systems. Journal of Applied Logic, 2(1):63 - 91. The Sixth International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science. doi:10.1016/j.jal.2004.01.004.
  14. Lindahl, L. and Odelstad, J. (2008). Intermediaries and intervenients in normative systems. Journal of Applied Logic, 6(2):229 - 250. Selected papers from the 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science, 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science. doi:10.1016/j.jal.2007.06.010.
  15. Lindahl, L. and Odelstad, J. (2011). Stratification of normative systems with intermediaries. Journal of Applied Logic, 9(2):113 - 136. Special Issue: Selected and revised papers from the Ninth International Conference on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2008), Ninth International Conference on Deontic Logic in Computer Science. doi:10.1016/j.jal.2010.01.002.
  16. Lindahl, L. and Odelstad, J. (2012). The Theory of JoiningSystems, volume 1. College Publications, London. To appear in Gabbay; Horthy; van der Meyden; and van der Torre: Handbook of Normative systems.
  17. Makinson, D. and van der Torre, L. (2007). What is input/output logic? input/output logic, constraints, permissions. In Boella, G., van der Torre, L., and Verhagen, H., editors, Normative Multi-agent Systems, number 07122 in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Dagstuhl, Germany. Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum f ür Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany.
  18. Meyer, J.-J. C. (1987). A different approach to deontic logic: deontic logic viewed as a variant of dynamic logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 29(1):109-136. doi:10.1305/ndjfl/1093637776.
  19. Odelstad, J. (2008). Many-Sorted Implicative Conceptual Systems. PhD thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Computer and Systems Sciences, DSV. QC 20100901.
  20. Odelstad, J. and Boman, M. (2004). Algebras for agent norm-regulation. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 42:141-166. doi:10.1023/B:AMAI.0000034525.49481.4a.
  21. Raskin, J.-F., van der Torre, L. W., and Tan, Y.-H. (1996). How to model normative behavior in petri nets. In Proceedings of the 2nd Modelage Workshop on Formal Models of Agents, pages 223-241.
  22. Sergot, M. (2008). Action and agency in norm-governed multi-agent systems. In Artikis, A., O'Hare, G., Stathis, K., and Vouros, G., editors, Engineering Societies in the Agents World VIII, volume 4995 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1-54. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-87654- 0 1.
  23. van der Meyden, R. (1996). The dynamic logic of permission. Journal of Logic and Computation, 6(3):465- 479.
  24. Vazquez-Salceda, J., Aldewereld, H., and Dignum, F. (2004). Implementing norms in multiagent systems. In Lindemann, G., Denzinger, J., Timm, I., and Unland, R., editors, Multiagent System Technologies, volume 3187 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 313-327. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30082-3 23.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Hjelmblom M. (2013). Norm-regulated Transition System Situations . In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1: ICAART, ISBN 978-989-8565-38-9, pages 109-117. DOI: 10.5220/0004260801090117


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icaart13,
author={Magnus Hjelmblom},
title={Norm-regulated Transition System Situations},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1: ICAART,},
year={2013},
pages={109-117},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004260801090117},
isbn={978-989-8565-38-9},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence - Volume 1: ICAART,
TI - Norm-regulated Transition System Situations
SN - 978-989-8565-38-9
AU - Hjelmblom M.
PY - 2013
SP - 109
EP - 117
DO - 10.5220/0004260801090117