The design of intelligent socio-technical systems

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Andrew J. I. Jones (1)
  Alexander Artikis (2)
  Jeremy Pitt (3)
  
• 关键词：Conceptual and computational models ; Socio ; technical systems ; Multi ; agent systems ; Synthetic method
• 刊名：Artificial Intelligence Review
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：January 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：39
• 期：1
• 页码：5-20
• 参考文献：1. Akman V, Erdogan S, Lee J, Lifschitz V, Turner H (2004) Representing the zoo world and the traffic world in the language of the causal calculator. Artif Intell 153(1-):105-40 CrossRef
  2. Allen L (1957) A razor-edged tool for drafting and interpreting legal documents. Yale Law J 66:833-79 CrossRef
  3. Andrews P, Polack F, Sampson A, Stepney S, Timmis J (2010), The CoSMoS process, version 0.1: a process for the modelling and simulation of complex systems. Technical report YS-2010-453, University of York
  4. Artikis A, Sergot M (2010) Executable specification of open multi-agent systems. Logic J IGPL 18(1):31-5 CrossRef
  5. Artikis A, Sergot M, Pitt J (2007) Executable specification of a formal argumentation protocol. Artif Intell 171(10-5):776-04 CrossRef
  6. Brewka G (2001) Dynamic argument systems: a formal model of argumentation processes based on situation calculus. J Logic Comput 11(2):257-82 CrossRef
  7. Castelfranchi C, Falcone R (1998) Social trust. In: Proceedings of the first workshop on deception, fraud and trust in agent societies, pp 35-9
  8. Castelfranchi C, Tan YH (eds) (2001) Trust and deception in virtual societies. Kluwer, Dordrecht
  9. Chopra A, Singh M (2006) Contextualising commitment protocols. In: Proceedings of the conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS), ACM, pp 1345-352
  10. Craven R, Sergot M (2008) Agent strands in the action language nC+. J Appl Logic 6(2):172-91 CrossRef
  11. Delgrande J (1988) An approach to default reasoning based on a first-order conditional logic: revised report. Artif Intell 36:62-0
  12. Dennett D (1995) Darwin’s dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. Penguin Books, London
  13. Edmonds B, Gilbert N, Gustafson S, Hales D, Krasnogor N (eds) (2005) Socially inspired computing. In: Proceedings of the joint symposium on socially inspired computing, AISB
  14. FIPA (2002) FIPA communicative act library specification. http://www.fipa.org/specs/fipa00037/index.html
  15. Fornara N, Colombetti M (2009) Formal specification of artificial institutions using the event calculus. Multi-agent systems: semantics and dynamics of organizational models, IGI Global
  16. Fox M, Barbuceanu M, Grüninger M, Lin J (1998) An organizational ontology for enterprise modeling. In: Prietula M, Carley K, Gasser L (eds) Simulating organizations: computational models for institutions and groups. AAAI Press/MIT Press, pp 131-52
  17. Giunchiglia E, Lee J, Lifschitz V, McCain N, Turner H (2004) Nonmonotonic causal theories. Artif Intell 153(1-):49-04 CrossRef
  18. Grossi D, Jones A (in press) Constitutive norms and counts-as conditionals. In: Gabbay D, Horty J, van der Meyden R, van der Torre L (eds) Handbook on logic of normative systems, vol 1. College Publications, UK
  19. Grüninger M, Fox M (1994) The role of competency questions in enterprise engineering. In: Proceedings of the IFIP WG5.7 workshop on benchmarking-theory and practice
  20. Herzig A, Lorini E, Hübner JF, Ben-Naim J, Castelfranchi C, Demolombe R, Longin, D, Vercouter L (2008) Prolegomena for a logic of trust and reputation. In: Proceedings of NORMAS, pp 143-57
  21. Herzig A, Lorini E, Hübner JF, Vercouter L (2010) A logic of trust and reputation. Logic J IGPL 18(1):214-44 CrossRef
  22. Hohfeld W (1913) Some fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. Yale Law J 23(16):16-9
  23. Jones A, Sergot M (1933) On the characterization of law and computer systems: the normative systems perspective. In: Meyer JJ, Wieringa R (eds) Deontic logic in computer science. Wiley, Chichester
  24. Jones A, Sergot M (1996) A formal characterization of institutionalised power. J IGPL 4(3):429-45
  25. Jones A, Pitt J, Artikis A (2011) On the analysis and implementation of normative systems—towards a methodology. In: Proceedings of the workshop on coordination, organisation, institutions and norms (COIN), at the 10th international conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems. Taipei, Taiwan, pp 47-6
  26. Kanger S (1957) New foundations for ethical theory, University of Stockholm, Department of Philosophy. Also in: Hilpinen R (ed) Deontic logic: introductory and systematic readings. Reidel, Dordrecht
  27. Kanger S (1972) Law and logic. Theoria 38:105-32 CrossRef
  28. Kanger S, Kanger H (1966) Rights and parliamentarism. Theoria 32:85-15 CrossRef
  29. Kowalski R, Sergot M (1986) A logic-based calculus of events. New Gener Comput 4(1):67-6 CrossRef
  30. Levesque H, Pirri F, Reiter R (1998) Foundations for the situation calculus. Link?ping Electron Articles Comput Inf Sci 3:159-78
  31. Lewis D (1969) Convention—a philosophical study. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
  32. Lindahl L (1977) Position and change: a study in law and logic. Reidel, Dordrecht CrossRef
  33. Marín R, Sartor G (1999) Time and norms; a formalisation in the event calculus. In: Proceedings of the conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL), ACM Press, pp 90-00
  34. McCarthy J (1963) A basis for a mathematical theory of computation. In: Braffort P, Hirschberg D (eds) Computer programming and formal systems. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 33-0 CrossRef
  35. Oren N, Luck M, Miles S (2010) A model of normative power. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS), pp 815-22
  36. Pinto J, Reiter R (1993) Temporal reasoning in logic programming: a case for the situation calculus. In: Warren D (ed) Proceedings of conference on logic programming. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 203-21
  37. Pinyol I, Sabater-Mir J (2011) Computational trust and reputation models for open multi-agent systems: a review. Artif Intell Rev (Springer online-first)
  38. P?rn I (1970) The logic of power. Blackwell, Oxford
  39. P?rn I (1977) Action theory and social science—some formal models, Synthese Library vol 120. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland
  40. Prakken H, Sergot M (1996) Contrary-to-duty obligations. Studia Logica 57:91-15 CrossRef
  41. Reiter R (1993) Proving properties of states in the situation calculus. Artif Intell 64:337-51 CrossRef
  42. Sandhu R, Ferraiolo D, Kuhn R (2000) The NIST model for role-based action control: toward a unified standard. In: The 5th ACM workshop on role-based access control, RAC -0, pp 47-3
  43. Santos F (2002) A modal logic framework for organization analysis and design. In: Horty J, Jones A (eds) Proceedings of the workshop on deontic logic in computer science (DEON), pp 279-99
  44. Santos F, Jones A, Carmo J (1997) Action concepts for describing organized interaction. In: Sprague RA (ed) HICCS -7: proceedings of the 30th Hawaii conference on system sciences. IEEE Computer Society, pp 373-82
  45. Sergot M (2008) Action and agency in norm-governed multi-agent systems. In: Artikis A, O’Hare G, Stathis K, Vouros G (eds) Proceedings of ESAW VIII, LNAI 4995. Springer, pp 1-4
  46. Sergot, M, Craven R (2006) The deontic component of action language nC+. In: Goble L, Meyer J-J (eds) Deontic logic in computer science (DEON-6), LNAI 4048. Springer, pp 222-37
  47. Sergot M, Richards F (2001) On the representation of action and agency in the theory of normative positions. Fundamenta Informaticae 48(2-):273-93
  48. Skyrms B (2010) Signals: evolution. learning and information. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  49. Steels L, Brooks R (1994) The artificial life route to artificial intelligence: building situated embodied agents. Lawrence Erlbaum Ass, New Haven
  50. Yolum P, Singh M (2004) Reasoning about commitments in the event calculus: an approach for specifying and executing protocols. Ann Math Artif Intell 42(1-):227-53 CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Andrew J. I. Jones (1)
  Alexander Artikis (2)
  Jeremy Pitt (3)
  
  1. Department of Informatics, King’s College London, London, UK
  2. National Centre for Scientific Research ‘Demokritos- Athens, Greece
  3. Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK
  
• ISSN：1573-7462

文摘

The design of intelligent socio-technical systems calls for careful examination of relevant social and organizational concepts. We present a method for supporting this design process, placing emphasis on different levels of formal characterization, with equal attention to both the analysis of concepts in a formal calculus independent of computational concerns, and the representation of concepts in a machine-processable form, fully cognizant of implementation issues—a step in the method we refer to as principled operationalization. There are many tools (i.e. formal languages) that can be used to support the design method; we define and discuss criteria for evaluating such tools. We believe that, were the method proposed to be adopted, it would enhance the state-of-the-art in the systematic design and engineering of socio-technical systems, respecting the fundamentally interdisciplinary nature of those tasks, in both their theoretical and practical dimensions.