![](bg4.png)
The field hdeonticReli defines the deontic relation that
is activated if the condition is satisfied. It may take
the values ’O’ for an obligation, ’P’ for a permission
and ’I’ for a prohibition.
The hroleIdi refers to the role defined in the SS :
the agent playing this role will have to behave
according to the deontic relation that precedes this
role with respect of the concerned deontic action.
This last is defined with reference to the missions
(hmissionIdi) or to the action (hactionIdi) detailed in
the FS. We added a temporal expression to this
deontic relation. For the moment we only used
the precedence operator ‘<’ but an extension is
possible.
This deontic specification enables us to specify and
structure the contract execution. The setup of a con-
tract is done by defining the header, the general condi-
tions and the structural, functional and deontic speci-
fications. In other words we describe the elements of
the contract, the organization of the participants, the
clauses and finally the contract execution methods.
Thanks to the structure of MOISE
+
our model pro-
posal introduces independently the structural part and
the functional part of it. The structural specifica-
tion defines the roles and the obligations linking these
roles within the contractual group. The FS defines
the whole missions which will be involved in the con-
tract. Missions are organized in the social diagram
of execution which represents the contract execution
structure. Other missions are located in the social di-
agram of sanction which specifies the ones related to
the sanctions. This allows distinction between normal
and exceptional scenarios of the contract (in case of
non-respect of engagement). All necessary elements
to the implementation of the contractual relation was
defined beforehand in the header and the general con-
ditions of the contract. Finally the deontic specifi-
cation establishes the link between the structural and
functional aspects to define the various scenarios of
execution with an adequate representation that per-
mits the course of the sanctions and to reason on the
consequences of the non-observance of a clause.
5 CONCLUSION
We presented in this paper a new approach that pro-
vides an organizational model for Multi-Agent Sys-
tems. The concept of organization has been described
through three views: an structural view (group, role
and relations between them), a functional view (plans,
goals and missions) and a deontic view (association of
roles with missions involving a deontic operator and
a concept of sanction in case of non-respect of com-
mitments).
The notion of sanction has been added to the initial
MOIS E
+
model introduced in (Hubner et al., 2002).
This constrains the agents behaviors and controls their
autonomy. Actually an agent that has to execute its
missions can loose commitment because of others
missions allowing as well the achievement of local
goals and takes priority. In order to avoid a commu-
nity of airy agents, a reputation could be built on the
sanctions associated with validation or not of an exe-
cuted execution.
REFERENCES
Chaib-draa, B., Moulin, B., and Jarras, I. (2001). Agent
et syst
`
emes multiagents. In et Y Demazeau, J. B.,
editor, Principes et architecture des syst
`
emes multi-
agents. Hermes, Lavoisier.
Dignum, V., Meyer, J., Weigand, H., and Dignum, F.
(2002). An organizational-oriented model for agent
societies. In International Workshop on Regulated
Agent-Based Social Systems: Theories and Applica-
tions (RASTA’02) at AAMAS, Bologna, Italy.
Hubner, J., Sichman, J., and Boissier, O. (2002). Moise+:
towards a structural, functional, and deontic model
for mas organization. In Proceedings of the first in-
ternational joint conference on Autonomous agents
and multiagent systems, pages 501–502, Bologna,
Italy. ACM Press. ISBN 1-58113-480-0. URL:
www.lti.pcs.usp.br/moise/.
Jennings, N., Sycara, K., and Wooldridge, M. (1998). A
roadmap of agent research and development. Au-
tonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 1(1):7–
38.
Khadraoui, D. and Dubois, E. (2003). B2b econtract so-
lution for teleservices. In International Conference
on Intelligent Agents, Web Technologies and Internet
Commerce (IAWTIC2003), pages 12–14, Vienna, Aus-
tria. ISBN 1740880692.
Zlatev, Z. (2002). Examination of the negotiation domain.
Technical report, EEMCS department, University of
Twente.
ICEIS 2004 - ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS
492