Semantic Web Technology for Agent Communication Protocols

handclockΑσφάλεια

5 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 4 χρόνια και 4 μέρες)

53 εμφανίσεις

SemanticWeb Technology
forAgentCommunication
Protocols
IdoiaBerges
J. Bermúdez, A. Goñi andA. Illarramendi
Grupo BDI. UPV-EHU.
5th
EuropeanSemanticWeb Conference.
Tenerife. Spain.
2
Outline

Motivationandgoal

Ontologyforcommunicationacts

Protocoldescriptions

Relationshipsbetweenprotocols

Conclusions
3
Motivation
KQML-based
FIPA-based
Particular
ACL
X-based
RightNow!
4
Motivation
Wherewewanttoarriveat!
KQML-based
FIPA-based
Particular
ACL
X-based
CommOnt
Exchangeabilityofcommunicationacts
5
Motivation

Exchangeabilityofcommunicationactsisnot
enough

Sharingofcommunicationprotocolsis
needed
6
Proposal: Goal

Referentialrepresentationsfor

communicationacts

communicationprotocols
usingSemanticWeb technology.
7
Proposal: Contributions

Tofavoura flexible agentinteroperation.

Tofacilitatecustomizationofcommunication
protocols.

A basisforreasoningaboutprotocol
relationships.

Takeaccountofsemanticsin protocol
representations.
8
Outline

Motivationandgoal

Ontologyforcommunicationacts

Protocoldescriptions

Relationshipsbetweenprotocols

Conclusions
9
CommOntdesigncriteria(1)

SpeechActsTheory

A communicationactisbasicallycomposedofan
envelopeanda content
Intention + communication information
Object of the intention
10
CommOntdesigncriteria(2)

Social commitmentsapproach

Objectiveandverifiablesemantics

Formalization:

Commitment

C(x, y, p)

Conditionalcommitment 
CC(x,y,c,p)

CC(x,y,c,p) ʌc→C(x,y,p)
11
CommOntdesigncriteria(3)

Axiomatizationofcommunicationactswith
EventCalculus:

First-ordertheoryforreasoningaboutactions

Events(actions) initiateandterminatefluents

Fluentsare propositionswhosevalueissubjectto
changeovertime
12
EventCalculuspredicates
FromPınar YolumandMunindarP. Singh
13
Rules

Tocapture thedynamicsofcommitments
14
CommOntdesigncriteria(4)

MaterializationofCommOnt: OWL ontology
Upperlayer
Standardslayer
Applicationslayer
15
CommOnt upperlayer
Mainsubclasses:
Assertive, Directive, Commissive, ExpressiveandDeclarative
Othersubclasses:
16
CommOnt upperlayer
17
CommOnt standardslayer

Veryimportantfortheinteroperabilitygoal:
18
CommOnt applicationslayer
19
Communicationprocess
20
Outline

Motivationandgoal

Ontologyforcommunicationacts

Protocoldescriptions

Relationshipsbetweenprotocols

Conclusions
21
Protocoldescriptions 
Model: StateTransitionSystem
Transitionslabeledwithclassesof
CommunicationActs

Statesassociatedtosetsoffluents
22
Protocoldescription
23
Simulationofa protocolrun
24
Outline

Motivationandgoal

Ontologyforcommunicationacts

Protocoldescriptions

Relationshipsbetweenprotocols

Conclusions
25
Protocolrelationships(1)

T(A) isthesetoftraces ofA

ProtocolA isequivalenttoprotocolB if
“T(A) = T(B)”
26
Protocolrelationships(2)
Protocol A is a restrictionof protocol B if
“T(A) ⊂T(B)”
27
Protocolrelationships(3) 
ProtocolA isspecialized-equivalentto
protocolB if“T(A) =«T(B)”
28
Protocolrelationships(4) 
ProtocolA isspecialized-restrictionto
protocolB if“T(A) ⊂«T(B)”
29
Outline

Motivationandgoal

Ontologyforcommunicationacts

Protocoldescriptions

Relationshipsbetweenprotocols

Conclusions
30
Conclusions

Ourproposalfacilitates:
UsingCommOnt ontology:
Managementofsemanticaspectswhendealingwith
agentcommunicationprotocols

Customizationofstandardcommunicationprotocols

Supportfordiscoveringdifferentkindsof
relationshipsbetweenprotocols

Use ofstandardSemanticWeb tools
Thanksforyourattention!