skip to main content
10.1145/1160633.1160813acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaamasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Hierarchical planning in BDI agent programming languages: a formal approach

Published:08 May 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper provides a general mechanism and a solid theoretical basis for performing planning within Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) agents. BDI agent systems have emerged as one of the most widely used approaches to implementing intelligent behaviour in complex dynamic domains, in addition to which they have a strong theoretical background. However, these systems either do not include any built-in capacity for "lookahead" type of planning or they do it only at the implementation level without any precise defined semantics. In some situations, the ability to plan ahead is clearly desirable or even mandatory for ensuring success. Also, a precise definition of how planning can be integrated into a BDI system is highly desirable. By building on the underlying similarities between BDI systems and Hierarchical Task Network (HTN) planners, we present a formal semantics for a BDI agent programming language which cleanly incorporates HTN-style planning as a built-in feature. We argue that the resulting integrated agent programming language combines the advantages of both BDI agent systems and hierarchical offline planners.

References

  1. J. Ambros-Ingerson. IPEM: Integrated Planning, Execution, and Monitoring. PhD thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Essex, U.K., 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. M. Bratman. Intentions, Plans, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. P. Busetta, R. Rönnquist, A. Hodgson, and A. Lucas. JACK Intelligent Agents - Components for Intelligent Agents in Java, AgentLink News Letter, Agent Oriented Software Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, January 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. B. J. Clement and E. H. Durfee. Theory for Coordinating Concurrent Hierarchical Planning Agents Using Summary Information. In Proc. of AAAI-99, pages 495--502, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G. De Giacomo, Y. Lespérance, and H. Levesque. ConGolog, A Concurrent Programming Language Based on the Situation Calculus. Artificial Intelligence, 121(1--2):109--169, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. G. De Giacomo and H. Levesque. An Incremental Interpreter for High-Level Programs with Sensing. In H. Levesque and F. Pirri, editors, Logical Foundation for Cognitive Agents: contr. in honor of Ray Reiter, pages 86--102. Springer, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. L. P. de Silva and L. Padgham. A Comparison of BDI Based Real-Time Reasoning and HTN Based Planning. In Proc. of Australian Joint Conference on AI, pages 1167--1173, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. P. de Silva and L. Padgham. Planning on Demand in BDI Systems. In Proc. of ICAPS-05 (Poster), 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. D. Dennett. The Intentional Stance. MIT Press, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. O. Despouys and F. F. Ingrand. Propice-Plan: Toward a Unified Framework for Planning and Execution. In Proc. of European Conference on Planning, pages 278--293, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. K. Erol, J. Hendler, and D. S. Nau. HTN Planning: Complexity and Expressivity. In Proc. of AAAI-94, pages 1123--1228, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. K. V. Hindriks, F. S. de Boer, W. van der Hoek, and J.-J. Ch. Meyer. Agent Programming in 3APL. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 2(4):357--401, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. F. F. Ingrand, M. P. Georgeff, and A. S. Rao. An Architecture for Real-Time Reasoning and System Control. IEEE Expert: Intelligent Systems and Their Applications, 7(6):34--44, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. C. A. Knoblock. Planning, Executing, Sensing, and Replanning for Information Gathering. In Proc. of IJCAI-95, pages 1686--1693, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. D. S. Nau, Y. Cao, A. Lotem, and H. Muñoz-Avila. SHOP: Simple Hierarchical Ordered Planner. In Proc. of IJCAI-99, pages 968--973, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. S. Nau, H. Muñoz-Avila, Y. Cao, A. Lotem, and S. Mitchell. Total-Order Planning with Partially Ordered Subtasks. In Proc. of IJCAI-01, pages 425--430, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. P. Paolucci, O. Shehory, K. P. Sycara, K. P. Kalp, and A. Pannu. A Planning Component for RETSINA Agents. In Proc. of ATAL-99, pages 147--161, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. G. Plotkin. A Structural Approach to Operational Semantics. Technical Report DAIMI-FN-19, Dept. of Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. A. S. Rao. AgentSpeak(L): BDI Agents Speak Out in a Logical Computable Language. In W. V. Velde and J. W. Perram, editors, Agents Breaking Away (LNAI), volume 1038 of LNAI, pages 42--55. Springer-Verlag, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. J. Thangarajah, L. Padgham, and M. Winikoff. Detecting & Exploiting Positive Goal Interaction in Intelligent Agents. In Proc. of AAMAS-03, pages 401--408, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. M. B. van Riemsdijk, M. Dastani, and J.-J. Ch. Meyer. Semantics of Declarative Goals in Agent Programming. In Proc. of AAMAS-05, pages 133--140, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. D. E. Wilkins and K. L. Myers. A Common Knowledge Representation for Plan Generation and Reactive Execution. Journal of Logic and Computation, 5(6):731--761, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. D. E. Wilkins and K. L. Myers. A Multiagent Planning Architecture. In Proc. of AIPS-98, pages 154--162, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Winikoff, L. Padgham, J. Harland, and J. Thangarajah. Declarative & Procedural Goals in Intelligent Agent Systems. In Proc. of KR-02, pages 470--481, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Hierarchical planning in BDI agent programming languages: a formal approach

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      AAMAS '06: Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems
      May 2006
      1631 pages
      ISBN:1595933034
      DOI:10.1145/1160633

      Copyright © 2006 ACM

      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: 8 May 2006

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate1,155of5,036submissions,23%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader