skip to main content
research-article

Specifying norm-governed computational societies

Published: 23 January 2009 Publication History

Abstract

Electronic markets, dispute resolution and negotiation protocols are three types of application domains that can be viewed as open agent societies. Key characteristics of such societies are agent heterogeneity, conflicting individual goals and unpredictable behavior. Members of such societies 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 open agent societies. We adopt an external perspective and view societies as instances of normative systems. In this article, we demonstrate how the framework can be applied to specifying and executing a contract-net protocol. The specification is formalized in two action languages, the C+ language and the Event Calculus, and executed using respective software implementations, the Causal Calculator and the Society Visualizer. We evaluate our executable specification in the light of the presented case study, discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the employed action languages for the specification of open agent societies.

References

[1]
Akman, V., Erdogan, S., Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., and Turner, H. 2004. Representing the zoo world and the traffic world in the language of the Causal Calculator. AI 153, 1--2, 105--140.
[2]
Artikis, A. 2003. Executable specification of open norm-governed computational systems. Ph.D. thesis, University of London. http://www.iit.demokritos.gr/~a.artikis/publications/artikis-phd.pdf (also available from the author).
[3]
Artikis, A., Pitt, J., and Sergot, M. 2002. Animated specifications of computational societies. In Proceedings of Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), C. Castelfranchi and L. Johnson, Eds. ACM, New York, 1053--1062.
[4]
Artikis, A., Sergot, M., and Pitt, J. 2003. Specifying electronic societies with the Causal Calculator. In Proceedings of Workshop on Agent-Oriented Software Engineering III (AOSE), F. Giunchiglia, J. Odell, and G. Weiss, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2585, Springer-Verlag, Brlin Germany. 1--15.
[5]
Artikis, A., Sergot, M., and Pitt, J. 2007. An executable specification of a formal argumentation protocol. AI 171, 10--15, 776--804.
[6]
Bing, J. 1998. Managing copyright in a digital environment. In The Impact of Electronic Publishing on the Academic Community, I. Butterworth, Ed. Portland Press, 52--62.
[7]
Bradshaw, J., Uszok, A., Jeffers, R., Suri, N., Hayes, P., Burstein, M., Acquisti, A., Benyo, B., Breedy, M., Carvalho, M., Diller, D., Johnson, M., Kulkarni, S., Lott, J., Sierhuis, M., and Hoof, R. V. 2003. Representation and reasoning about DAML-based policy and domain services in KAoS. In Proceedings of Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS), J. Rosenschein, T. Sandholm, M. Wooldridge, and M. Yokoo, Eds. ACM, New York, 835--842.
[8]
Brewka, G. 2001. Dynamic argument systems: A formal model of argumentation processes based on situation calculus. J. Logic Comput. 11, 2, 257--282.
[9]
Carley, K. and Gasser, L. 1999. Computational organization theory. In Multi-Agent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, G. Weiss, Ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 299--330.
[10]
Chittaro, L. and Montanari, A. 1996. Efficient temporal reasoning in the cached event calculus. Comput. Intell. 12, 3, 359--382.
[11]
Cimatti, A., Clarke, E., Giunchiglia, E., Giunchiglia, F., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Sebastiani, R., and Tacchella, A. 2002. NuSMV Version 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Aided Verification (CAV'02), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2404, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, http://nusmv.irst.itc.it.
[12]
Clark, K. 1978. Negation as failure. In Logic and Databases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker, Eds. Plenum Press, New York, 293--322.
[13]
Clarke, E. M., Grumberg, O., and Peled, D. A. 2000. Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
[14]
Coleman, D., Arnold, P., Bodoff, S., Dollin, C., Gilchrist, H., Hayes, F., and Jeremaes, P. 1994. Object-Oriented Development: The FUSION Method. Prentice Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[15]
Colombetti, M. 2000. A commitment-based approach to agent speech acts and conversations. In Proceedings of Workshop on Agent Languages and Communication Policies. 21--29.
[16]
Craven, R. 2006. Execution mechanisms for the action language C+. Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, London, UK.
[17]
Craven, R. and Sergot, M. 2005. Distant causation in C+. Studia Logica 79, 1, 73--96.
[18]
Davis, R. and Smith, R. 1983. Negotiation as a metaphor for distributed problem solving. AI 20, 63--109.
[19]
Esteva, M., de la Cruz, D., and Sierra, C. 2002a. ISLANDER: An electronic institutions editor. In Proceedings of Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), C. Castelfranchi and L. Johnson, Eds. ACM, New York, 1045--1052.
[20]
Esteva, M., Padget, J., and Sierra, C. 2002b. Formalizing a language for institutions and norms. In Intelligent Agents VIII: Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, J.-J. Meyer and M. Tambe, Eds. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2333. Springer-Verlag, New York, 348--366.
[21]
Esteva, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J., Arcos, J., Sierra, C., and Garcia, P. 2000. Institutionalising open multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS), E. Durfee, Ed. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitis, CA, 381--382.
[22]
Esteva, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J., Sierra, C., Garcia, P., and Arcos, J. 2001. On the formal specifications of electronic institutions. In Agent Mediated Electronic Commerce, F. Dignum and C. Sierra, Eds. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1991, Springer-Verlag, New York, 126--147.
[23]
Farrell, A., Sergot, M., Sallé, M., and Bartolini, C. 2005. Using the event calculus for tracking the normative state of contracts. Int. J. Coop. Informa. Syst. 4, 2--3, 99--129.
[24]
Ferber, J. and Gutknecht, O. 1998. A meta-model for the analysis and design of organizations in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS), Y. Demazeau, Ed. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 128--135.
[25]
Ferber, J. and Gutknecht, O. 2000. Operational semantics of multi-agent organisations. In Intelligent Agents IV: Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, N. Jennings and Y. Lesperance, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1757, Springer-Verlag, New York, 205--217.
[26]
Fitoussi, D. and Tennenholtz, M. 2000. Choosing social laws for multi-agent systems: Minimality and simplicity. AI 119, 1-2, 61--101.
[27]
Foster, I., Kesselman, C., and Tuecke, S. 2001. The anatomy of the grid—Enabling scalable virtual organisations. Int. J. Supercomput. Appl. 15, 3, 200--222.
[28]
Fox, M., Barbuceanu, M., Grüninger, M., and Lin, J. 1998. An organizational ontology for enterprise modeling. In Simulating Organizations: Computational Models for Institutions and Groups, M. Prietula, K. Carley, and L. Gasser, Eds. AAAI Press/The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 131--152.
[29]
Gelati, J., Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. 2002a. Declarative power, representation, and mandate. A formal analysis. In Proceedings of Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX).
[30]
Gelati, J., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. 2002b. Normative autonomy and normative co-ordination: declarative power, representation, and mandate. In Proceedings of Workshop on the Law of Electronic Agents (LEA). 133--149.
[31]
Gelfond, M. 2002. Representing knowledge in A-Prolog. In Computational Logic: Logic Programming and Beyond. Essays in Honour of Robert A. Kowalski. Part II, A. Kakas and F. Sadri, Eds. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2408, Springer-Verlag, New York, 413--451.
[32]
Giunchiglia, E., Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., McCain, N., and Turner, H. 2004. Nonmonotonic causal theories. AI 153, 1--2, 49--104.
[33]
Giunchiglia, E., Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., and Turner, H. 2001. Causal laws and multi-valued fluents. In Proceedings of Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Action and Change (NRAC).
[34]
Governatori, G., Gelati, J., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. 2002. Actions, institutions, powers: Preliminary notes. In Proceedings of Workshop on Regulated Agent-Based Social Systems: Theories and Applications (RASTA). 69--79.
[35]
Hardwick, M. and Bolton, R. 1997. The industrial virtual enterprise. Comm. ACM 40, 9, 59--60.
[36]
Hewitt, C. 1991. Open information systems semantics for distributed artificial intelligence. AI 47, 79--106.
[37]
Jones, A. 2001. Roles. In Deliverable D2 of ALFEBIITE EU-Project (IST-1999-10298), A. Jones and C. Krogh, Eds. 52--55. http://alfebiite.ee.ic.ac.uk/docs/Deliverables/D2.pdf.
[38]
Jones, A. and Sergot, M. 1993. On the characterisation of law and computer systems: the normative systems perspective. In Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification. Wiley, New Yrok, 275--307.
[39]
Jones, A. and Sergot, M. 1996. A formal characterisation of institutionalised power. J. IGPL 4, 3, 429--445.
[40]
Kautz, H. and Selman, B. 1992. Planning as satisfiability. In Proceedings of European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), B. Neumann, Ed. Wiley, New York, 359--363.
[41]
Kesim, F. and Sergot, M. 1996. Implementing an object-oriented deductive database using temporal reasoning. J. Datab. Manag. 7, 4.
[42]
Klein, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J., and Dellarocas, C. 2003. Using domain-independent exception handling services to enable robust open multi-agent systems: the case of agent death. J. Autonom. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 7, 1--2, 179--189.
[43]
Kowalski, R. and Sergot, M. 1986. A logic-based calculus of events. New Generation Comput. 4, 1, 67--96.
[44]
Lee, J., Lifschitz, V., and Turner, H. 2001. A representation of the zoo world in the language of the Causal Calculator. In Proceedings of Symposium on Formalizations of Commonsense Knowledge.
[45]
Lifschitz, V. 2000. Missionaries and cannibals in the Causal Calculator. In Proceedings of Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), A. Cohn, F. Giunchiglia, and B. Selman, Eds. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 85--96.
[46]
Lifschitz, V., Mccain, N., Remolina, E., and Tacchella, A. 2000. Getting to the airport: the oldest planning problem in AI. In Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence, J. Minker, Ed. Kluwer, 147--168.
[47]
Lifschitz, V. and Turner, H. 1999. Representing transition systems by logic programs. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning (LPNMR'99). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1730, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 92--106.
[48]
Makinson, D. 1986. On the formal representation of rights relations. J. Philos. Logic 15, 403--425.
[49]
Manna, Z. and Pnueli, A. 1992. The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems. Springer-Verlag, New York.
[50]
Manna, Z. and Pnueli, A. 1995. Temporal Verification of Reactive Systems—Safety. Springer-Verlag, New York.
[51]
Minsky, N. 1991a. The imposition of protocols over open distributed systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 17, 2, 183--195.
[52]
Minsky, N. 1991b. Law-governed systems. Softw. Engin. J. 6, 5, 285--302.
[53]
Minsky, N. and Ungureanu, V. 2000. Law-governed interaction: a coordination and control mechanism for heterogeneous distributed systems. ACM Trans. Soft. Engin. Method. 9, 3, 273--305.
[54]
Moses, Y. and Tennenholtz, M. 1992. On computational aspects of artificial social systems. In Proceedings of Workshop on Distributed Artificial Intelligence (DAI). 267--284.
[55]
Moses, Y. and Tennenholtz, M. 1995. Artificial social systems. Computers AI 14, 6, 533--562.
[56]
Mueller, E. 2004. Event calculus reasoning through satisfiability. J. Logic Comput. 14, 5, 703--730.
[57]
Noda, I., Matsubara, H., Hiraki, K., and Frank, I. 1998. Soccer server: a tool for research on multi-agent systems. App. AI 12, 2--3, 233--250.
[58]
Pinto, J. and Reiter, R. 1993. Temporal reasoning in logic programming: a case for the situation calculus. In Proceedings of Conference on Logic Programming, D. Warren, Ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 203--221.
[59]
Pitt, J., Kamara, L., and Artikis, A. 2001. Interaction patterns and observable commitments in a multi-agent trading scenario. In Proceedings of Conference on Autonomous Agents (AA), J. Müller, E. Andre, S. Sen, and C. Frasson, Eds. ACM, New York, 481--489.
[60]
Pörn, I. 1977. Action theory and social science: some formal models. In Synthese Library Number 120. D. Reidel Publishing Company.
[61]
Prakken, H. 2005. Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. J. Logic Comput. 15, 1009--1040.
[62]
Prakken, H. and Gordon, T. 1999. Rules of order for electronic group decision making—a formalization methodology. In Collaboration between Human and Artificial Societies, J. Padget, Ed. Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 1624, Springer-Verlag, New York, 246--263.
[63]
Rodriguez-Aguilar, J., Martin, F., Noriega, P., Garcia, P., and Sierra, C. 1998. Towards a test-bed for trading agents in electronic auction markets. AI Comm. 11, 1, 5--19.
[64]
Rodriguez-Aguilar, J. and Sierra, C. 2002. Enabling open agent institutions. In Socially Intelligent Agents: Creating Relationships with Computers and Robots, K. Dautenhahn, A. Bond, L. Canamero, and B. Edmonds, Eds. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 259--266.
[65]
Rosenschein, J. and Zlotkin, G. 1994. Rules of Encounter: Designing Conventions for Automated Negotiation among Computers. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
[66]
Sadighi, B. and Sergot, M. 2002. Contractual access control. In Proceedings of Workshop on Security Protocols. Leature Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2845. Springer-Verlag, New York. 96--102.
[67]
Santos, F., Jones, A., and Carmo, J. 1997. Action concepts for describing organised interaction. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), R. Sprague, Ed. C.S. Press, 373--382.
[68]
Searle, J. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
[69]
Sergot, M. 2001. A computational theory of normative positions. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 2, 4, 522--581.
[70]
Sergot, M. 2004a. (C+)++: An action language for modelling norms and institutions. Tech. rep. 2004/8, Department of Computing, Imperial College London, London, UK. http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/research/technicalreports/2004/DTR04-8.pdf.
[71]
Sergot, M. 2004b. Modelling unreliable and untrustworthy agent behavior. In Proceedings of Workshop on Monitoring, Security, and Rescue Techniques in Multiagent Systems (MSRAS), B. Dunin-Keplicz, A. Jankowski, A. Skowron, and M. Szczuka, Eds. Advances in Soft Computing. Springer-Verlag, New York, 161--178.
[72]
Sergot, M. and Craven, R. 2006. The deontic component of action language nC+. In Deontic Logic and Artificial Normative Systems. Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON'06), L. Goble and J.-J. C. Meyer, Eds. Lecture Notes in Artificial Inteligence, vol. 4048. Springer-Verlag, New York, 222--237.
[73]
Shanahan, M. 1999. The event calculus explained. In Artificial Intelligence Today, M. Wooldridge and M. Veloso, Eds. Lecture Notes in Artificial Inteligence, vol. 1600. Springer-Verlag, New York, 409--430.
[74]
Shanahan, M. 2000. An abductive event calculus planner. J. Logic Program. 44, 207--239.
[75]
Shanahan, M. and Witkowski, M. 2004. Event calculus planning through satisfiability. J. Logic Comput. 14, 5, 731--745.
[76]
Shoham, Y. and Tennenholtz, M. 1992. On the synthesis of useful social laws for artificial agent societies. In Proceedings of Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), W. Swartout, Ed. The AAAI Press/The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 276--281.
[77]
Shoham, Y. and Tennenholtz, M. 1995. On social laws for artificial agent societies: Off-line design. AI 73, 1-2, 231--252.
[78]
Singh, M. 1998. Agent communication languages: Rethinking the principles. IEEE Comp. 31, 12, 40--47.
[79]
Singh, M. 2000. A social semantics for agent communication languages. In Issues in Agent Communication, F. Dignum and M. Greaves, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1916. Springer-Verlag, New York, 31--45.
[80]
Sirbu, M. 1997. Credits and debits on the Internet. IEEE Spectrum 34, 2, 23--29.
[81]
Smith, R. 1980. The contract-net protocol: High-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Trans. Comput. 29, 12, 1104--1113.
[82]
Smith, R. and Davis, R. 1978. Distributed problem solving: the contract-net approach. In Proceedings of Conference of Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence. 217--236.
[83]
Tennenholtz, M. 1995. On computational social laws for dynamic non-homogeneous social structures. J. Exper. Theor. AI 7, 379--390.
[84]
Werner, E. 1989. Cooperating agents: A unified theory of communication and social structure. In Distributed Artificial Intelligence, L. Gasser and M. Huhns, Eds. Vol. II. Morgan-Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 3--36.
[85]
Werner, E. 1992. The design of multi-agent systems. In Decentralized A.I., Vol. 3. E. Werner and Y. Demazeau, Eds. Elsevier Science Publishers, 3--30.
[86]
Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N., and Kinny, D. 1999. A methodology for agent-oriented analysis and design. In Proceedings of Conference on Autonomous Agents (AA), O. Etzioni, J. Müller, and J. Bradshaw, Eds. ACM, New York, 69--77.
[87]
Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N., and Kinny, D. 2000. The Gaia methodology for agent-oriented analysis and design. J. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 3, 3, 285--312.
[88]
Yolum, P. and Singh, M. 2002. Flexible protocol specification and execution: Applying event calculus planning using commitments. In Proceedings of Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), C. Castelfranchi and L. Johnson, Eds. ACM, New York, 527--535.
[89]
Yolum, P. and Singh, M. 2004. Reasoning about commitments in the event calculus: An approach for specifying and executing protocols. Annals Math. AI 42, 1--3, 227--253.
[90]
Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N., Omicini, A., and Wooldridge, M. 2001a. Agent-oriented software engineering for internet applications. In Coordination of Internet Agents: Models, Technologies, and Applications, A. Omicini, F. Zambonelli, M. Klusch, and R. Tolksdorf, Eds. Springer-Verlag, New York, 326--346.
[91]
Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N., and Wooldridge, M. 2001b. Organisational rules as an abstraction for the analysis and design of multi-agent systems. Int. J. Softw. Engin. Knowl. Engin. 11, 3, 303--328.
[92]
Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N., and Wooldridge, M. 2001c. Organizational abstractions for the analysis and design of multi-agent systems. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering, P. Ciancarini and M. Wooldridge, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1957. Springer-Verlag, New York, 235--252.
[93]
Zambonelli, F., Jennings, N., and Wooldridge, M. 2003. Developing multiagent systems: The GAIA methodology. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 12, 3, 317--370.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)NLP4Gov: A Comprehensive Library for Computational Policy AnalysisExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3650810(1-8)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2023)Communication Meaning: Foundations and Directions for Systems ResearchProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3545946.3598840(1786-1791)Online publication date: 30-May-2023
  • (2023)Interdependent Self-Organizing Mechanisms for Cooperative SurvivalArtificial Life10.1162/artl_a_0040329:2(198-234)Online publication date: 1-May-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
ACM Transactions on Computational Logic  Volume 10, Issue 1
January 2009
271 pages
ISSN:1529-3785
EISSN:1557-945X
DOI:10.1145/1459010
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 23 January 2009
Accepted: 01 October 2006
Received: 01 May 2006
Published in TOCL Volume 10, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Action language
  2. agent
  3. contract-net
  4. event calculus
  5. executable specification
  6. norm
  7. policy

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)15
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 19 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)NLP4Gov: A Comprehensive Library for Computational Policy AnalysisExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3650810(1-8)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • (2023)Communication Meaning: Foundations and Directions for Systems ResearchProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3545946.3598840(1786-1791)Online publication date: 30-May-2023
  • (2023)Interdependent Self-Organizing Mechanisms for Cooperative SurvivalArtificial Life10.1162/artl_a_0040329:2(198-234)Online publication date: 1-May-2023
  • (2023)A Knowledge Representation Framework for Evolutionary Simulations with Cognitive Agents2023 IEEE 35th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI)10.1109/ICTAI59109.2023.00059(361-368)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2023
  • (2023)Legal powers, subjections, disabilities, and immunitiesData & Knowledge Engineering10.1016/j.datak.2023.102219148:COnline publication date: 1-Nov-2023
  • (2023)Incentivising Participation with Exclusionary Sanctions (Full)Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, Norms, and Ethics for Governance of Multi-Agent Systems XVI10.1007/978-3-031-49133-7_3(37-54)Online publication date: 29-May-2023
  • (2022)Gist Trace-based Learning: Efficient Convention Emergence from Multilateral InteractionsACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems10.1145/350219916:1(1-20)Online publication date: 23-Jan-2022
  • (2022)Ensuring trustworthy and ethical behaviour in intelligent logical agentsJournal of Logic and Computation10.1093/logcom/exab091Online publication date: 25-Jan-2022
  • (2022)Legal Power-Subjection Relations: Ontological Analysis and Modeling PatternConceptual Modeling10.1007/978-3-031-17995-2_5(65-81)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2022
  • (2021)Game-theoretic Simulations with Cognitive Agents2021 IEEE 33rd International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI)10.1109/ICTAI52525.2021.00205(1300-1305)Online publication date: Nov-2021
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media