Skip to main content

Agent modelling in MetateM and DESIRE

  • Section IV: Formal Methods
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Intelligent Agents IV Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (ATAL 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1365))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 126 Accesses

  • 11 Citations

Abstract

In spite of the rapid spread of agent technology, there is, as yet, little evidence of an engineering approach to the development of multi-agent systems. For example, both development methods and verification techniques for multi-agent systems are rare. In this paper, we describe a case study aimed at comparing two formal agent modelling languages, namely Concurrent MetateM and DESIRE. A version of the well known PRS architecture is developed and the approaches are compared with respect to this application.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., Hunter, A. Meta-Reasoning in Executable Logic. In Proceedings of Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., Owens, R., and Reynolds, M. (editors). The Imperative Future — Principles of Executable Temporal Logic. Research Studies Press, UK, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brazier, F. M. T., Treur, J., Wijngaards, N. J. E. and Willems, M., Formal specification of Hierarchically (De)Composed Tasks, Data and Knowledge Engineering, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brazier, F. M. T., Treur, J., Wijngaards, N. J. E. and Willems, M., Temporal semantics of complex reasoning tasks In Proceedings of the 10th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-based Systems workshop. KAW'96, Calgary. Extended version to appear in: Data and Knowledge Engineering, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brazier, F. M. T., Dunin-Keplicz, B. M., Jennings, N. R. and Treur, J., DESIRE: Modelling multiagent systems in a compositional formal framework, In International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 6(1):67–94, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Burkhard, H. D., Liveness and Fairness Properties in Multi-Agent systems. In Proceedings 13th International Joint Conference on AI, Chambery, France, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cornelissen, F., Jonker, C., Treur, J., Compositional verification of knowledge based systems: a case study in diagnosis. In Proc. European Knowledge Acquisition Workshop, Lecture Notes in AI, Springer-Verlag, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fisher, M., Concurrent MetateM — A Language for Modelling Reactive Systems. In Parallel Architectures and Languages, Europe (PARLE), Munich, Germany, June 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fisher M., A survey of Concurrent MetateM — The language and its applications. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Temporal Logic. Springer Verlag, July 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fisher, M., A Normal Form for Temporal Logic and its Application in Theorem-Proving and Execution. In Journal of Logic and Computation, 7(4), 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fisher, M., and Wooldridge, M., On the Formal Specification and Verification of Multi-Agent Systems. In International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 6(1), 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fisher, M. Implementing BDI Systems by Direct Execution. In Proceedings 15th International Joint Conference on AI, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Georgeff, M. P. and Lansky, A. L. Reactive Reasoning and Planning. In Proceedings of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), Morgan Kaufmann, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hindricks, K., de Boer, F., van der Hoek, W., and Meyer, J-J. Ch. Formal Semantics of an Abstract Agent Programming Language. In this volume.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jonker, C.M. and Treur, J. Compositional Verification of Multi-Agent Systems: a Formal Analysis of Pro-activeness and Reactiveness. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Compositionality (COMPOS97), Springer Verlag, to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Luck, M., d'Invemo, M. A Formal Framework for Agency and Autonomy. In Proceedings First International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, AAAI Press/The MIT Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mulder, M. Comparing Agent Models in Concurrent MetateM and DESIRE. MSc Thesis, Department of Mathematics & Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  18. O'Hare, G. M. P. Agent Factory: An Environment for the Fabrication of Multi-Agent Systems. In: Foundations of Distributed Artificial Intelligence Wiley Interscience, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  19. A. S. Rao and M. P. Georgeff. Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Munindar P. SinghAnand RaoMichael J. Wooldridge

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Mulder, M., Treur, J., Fisher, M. (1998). Agent modelling in MetateM and DESIRE. In: Singh, M.P., Rao, A., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds) Intelligent Agents IV Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages. ATAL 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1365. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0026759

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0026759

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-64162-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69696-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Keywords

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Profiles

  1. Jan Treur