for eventually refining and enriching how such concepts are currently modeledin simpAL.References1. R. Bordini, J. Hübner, and M. Wooldridge. Programming Multi-Agent Systems inAgentSpeak Using Jason. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2007.2. R. Collier. Debugging agents in agent factory. Programming Multi-Agent Systems,pages 229–248, 2007.3. W. R. Cook, W. Hill, and P. S. Canning. Inheritance is not subtyping. In Proceedings<strong>of</strong> the 17th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles <strong>of</strong> programminglanguages, POPL ’90, pages 125–135, New York, NY, USA, 1990. ACM.4. F. Damiani, P. Giannini, A. Ricci, and M. Viroli. A calculus <strong>of</strong> agents and artifacts.In J. Cordeiro, A. Ranchordas, and B. Shishkov, editors, S<strong>of</strong>tware andData Technologies, volume 50 <strong>of</strong> Communications in Computer and InformationScience. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.5. S. Danforth and C. Tomlinson. Type theories and object-oriented programmimg.ACM Comput. Surv., 20(1):29–72, Mar. 1988.6. M. Dastani. 2apl: a practical agent programming language. Autonomous <strong>Agents</strong>and Multi-Agent Systems, 16(3):214–248, 2008.7. M. Dezani-Ciancaglini, D. Mostrous, N. Yoshida, and S. Drossopoulou. Sessiontypes for object-oriented languages. In D. Thomas, editor, ECOOP 2006, volume4067 <strong>of</strong> LNCS, pages 328–352. Springer, 2006.8. K. V. Hindriks. Programmingrationalagents in goal. In Multi-Agent Programming:,pages 119–157. Springer US, 2009.9. B. Meyer. Static typing. In ACM SIGPLAN OOPS Messenger, volume 6, pages20–29. ACM, 1995.10. A. Omicini, A. Ricci, and M. Viroli. Artifacts in the A&A meta-model for multiagentsystems. Autonomous <strong>Agents</strong> and Multi-Agent Systems, 17(3), Dec. 2008.11. A. Rao. AgentSpeak (L): BDI agents speak out in a logical computable language.Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1038:42–55, 1996.12. A. S. Rao and M. P. Georgeff. BDI <strong>Agents</strong>: From Theory to Practice. In FirstInternational Conference on Multi Agent Systems (ICMAS95), 1995.13. A. Ricci, M. Piunti, and M. Viroli. Environment programming in multi-agent systems:an artifact-based perspective. Autonomous <strong>Agents</strong> and Multi-Agent Systems,23:158–192, 2011.14. A. Ricci and A. Santi. Agent-oriented computing: <strong>Agents</strong> as a paradigm for computerprogramming and s<strong>of</strong>tware development. In Proc. <strong>of</strong> the 3rd Int. Conf.on Future Computational Technologies and Applications (Future Computing ’11),Rome, Italy, 2011. IARIA.15. A. Ricci and A. Santi. Designing a general-purpose programming language based onagent-oriented abstractions: the simpAL project. In Proc. <strong>of</strong> AGERE!’11, SPLASH’11 Workshops, pages 159–170, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM.16. R. J. Ross, R. W. Collier, and G. M. P. O’Hare. Af-apl - bridging principles andpractice in agent oriented languages. In Programming Multi-Agent Systems, volume3346 <strong>of</strong> Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 66–88. Springer, 2004.17. P. Wegner and S. B. Zdonik. Inheritance as an incremental modification mechanismor what like is and isn’t like. In Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the European Conference onObject-Oriented Programming, ECOOP ’88, pages 55–77, London, UK, UK, 1988.Springer-Verlag.147
Learning to Improve Agent Behaviours in GOALDhirendra Singh and Koen V. HindriksInteractive Intelligence Group, Delft <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> Technology, The NetherlandsAbstract. This paper investigates the issue <strong>of</strong> adaptability <strong>of</strong> behaviourin the context <strong>of</strong> agent-oriented programming. We focus on improvingaction selection in rule-based agent programming languages using a reinforcementlearning mechanism under the hood. The novelty is thatlearning utilises the existing mental state representation <strong>of</strong> the agent,which means that (i) the programming model is unchanged and usinglearning within the program becomes straightforward, and (ii) adaptivebehaviours can be combined with regular behaviours in a modular way.Overall, the key to effective programming in this setting is to balancebetween constraining behaviour using operational knowledge, and leavingflexibility to allow for ongoing adaptation. We illustrate this usingdifferent types <strong>of</strong> programs for solving the Blocks World problem.Keywords: Agent programming, rule selection, reinforcement learning1 IntroductionBelief-Desire-Intention (BDI) [1] is a practical and popular cognitive frameworkfor implementing practical reasoning in computer programs, that has inspiredmany agent programming languages such as AgentSpeak(L) [2], JACK [3], Jason [4],Jadex [5], CANPLAN [6], 3APL [7], 2APL [8], and Goal [9], to name a few. Despiteits success, an important drawback <strong>of</strong> the BDI model is the lack <strong>of</strong> a learningability, in that once deployed, BDI agents have no capacity to adapt andimprove their behaviour over time. In this paper, we address this issue in thecontext <strong>of</strong> BDI-like rule-based agent programming languages. Particularly, weextend the Goal agent programming language [9] for practical systems [10, 11]with a new language primitive that supports adaptive modules, i.e., moduleswithin which action choices resulting from programmed rules are learnt overtime. While we have chosen Goal for this study, our approach applies generallyto other rule-based programming languages. We use an <strong>of</strong>f-the-shelf reinforcementlearning [12] mechanism under the hood to implement this functionality.Our aim is to allow agent developers to easily program adaptive behavioursusing a programming model that they are already familiar with, and withouthaving to explicitly delve into machine learning technologies. Our idea is to leveragethe domain knowledge encoded into the agent program, by directly using themental state representation <strong>of</strong> the agent for learning purposes. This has the keybenefits that (i) the programmer need not worry about knowledge representationfor learning as a separate issue from programming; (ii) the programming model148
- Page 2 and 3:
Proceedings of the Tenth Internatio
- Page 4 and 5:
OrganisationOrganising CommitteeMeh
- Page 6:
Table of ContentseJason: an impleme
- Page 10 and 11:
in Sect. 3 the translation of the J
- Page 12 and 13:
init_count(0).max_count(2000).(a)(b
- Page 14 and 15:
For instance, a failure in the ERES
- Page 16 and 17:
{plan, fun start_count_trigger/1,fu
- Page 18 and 19:
single parameter, an Erlang record
- Page 20 and 21:
1. Belief annotations. Even though
- Page 22 and 23:
decisions taken during the design a
- Page 24 and 25:
Conceptual Integration of Agents wi
- Page 26 and 27:
Fig. 2. Active component structurep
- Page 28 and 29:
the service provider component. As
- Page 30 and 31:
Fig. 4. Web Service Invocationretri
- Page 32 and 33:
01: public interface IBankingServic
- Page 34 and 35:
tate them in the same way as in the
- Page 36 and 37:
01: public interface IChartService
- Page 38 and 39:
implementations being available for
- Page 41:
deliberative behavior in BDI archit
- Page 44 and 45:
layer modules (i.e. nodes) can be d
- Page 46 and 47:
different methods to choose the cur
- Page 48 and 49:
also a single scheduler module, imp
- Page 50 and 51:
andom choice (OR), conditional choi
- Page 52 and 53:
- Dealing with conflicts based on p
- Page 54 and 55:
5. Brooks, R. A. (1991) Intelligenc
- Page 56 and 57:
An Agent-Based Cognitive Robot Arch
- Page 58 and 59:
It has been argued that building ro
- Page 60 and 61:
EnvironmentHardwareLocal SoftwareC+
- Page 62 and 63:
a cognitive layer can connect as a
- Page 64 and 65:
can reliably be differentiated and
- Page 66 and 67:
4 ExperimentTo evaluate the feasibi
- Page 68 and 69:
learn or gain knowledge from experi
- Page 70 and 71:
A Programming Framework for Multi-A
- Page 72 and 73:
exchange and storage of tuples (key
- Page 74 and 75:
Although some success [13] [14] hav
- Page 76 and 77:
as well as important non-functional
- Page 78 and 79:
component plans have been instantia
- Page 80 and 81:
A in the example) can evaluate all
- Page 83 and 84:
1. robot-1 issues a Localization(ro
- Page 85 and 86:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTThis work has been su
- Page 87 and 88:
The code was analysed both objectiv
- Page 89 and 90:
a conversation is following. Additi
- Page 91 and 92:
the context of a communication-heav
- Page 93 and 94:
Table 1. Core Agent ProtocolsAgent
- Page 95 and 96:
statistically significant using an
- Page 97 and 98: to the conversation and has a perfo
- Page 99 and 100: principal reasons. Firstly, it is a
- Page 101 and 102: 2. Muldoon, C., O’Hare, G.M.P., C
- Page 103 and 104: In the following section we will at
- Page 105 and 106: DevelopmentProductionHuman Readabil
- Page 107 and 108: will then evaluate this new format
- Page 109 and 110: encoder, it is first checked if the
- Page 111 and 112: nents themselves. However, since th
- Page 113 and 114: optimized for this format feature s
- Page 115 and 116: Java serialization and Jadex Binary
- Page 117 and 118: 10. P. Hoffman and F. Yergeau, “U
- Page 119 and 120: Caching the results of previous que
- Page 121 and 122: querying an agent’s beliefs and g
- Page 123 and 124: or relative performance of each pla
- Page 125 and 126: were run for 1.5 minutes; 1.5 minut
- Page 127 and 128: Size N K n p c qry U c upd Update c
- Page 129 and 130: epresentation. The cache simply act
- Page 131 and 132: 6 ConclusionWe presented an abstrac
- Page 133 and 134: Typing Multi-Agent Programs in simp
- Page 135 and 136: 1 // agent ag02 iterations (" zero
- Page 137 and 138: 3.1 simpAL OverviewThe main inspira
- Page 139 and 140: 3.2 Typing Agents with Tasks and Ro
- Page 141 and 142: Defining Agent Scripts in simpAL (F
- Page 143 and 144: that sends a message to the receive
- Page 145 and 146: * error: wrong type for the param v
- Page 147: Given an organization model, it is
- Page 151 and 152: 2.1 Agent Programming LanguagesAgen
- Page 153 and 154: choosing actions is to find a good
- Page 155 and 156: 1 init module {2 knowledge{3 block(
- Page 157 and 158: of a module. For example, to change
- Page 159 and 160: if bel(on(X,Y), clear(X)), a-goal(c
- Page 161 and 162: mance. Figure 2d shows the same A f
- Page 163 and 164: the current percepts of the agent.
- Page 165: Author IndexAbdel-Naby, S., 69Alelc