peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Agent communication

Plan for next two lectures

Communication Agent Communication Languages Communication Protocols

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Agent Communication
For agents to communicate they must agree on:
The syntax of individual messages (i.e., the language) The sequence of messages (i.e., the protocol) N.B.1: Languages are distinct from protocols! N.B.2: We need both!

We shall look at proposals for

Agent communication languages (ACLs) Description of protocols

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Agent Communication (Contd)

Agents are different from distributed processes, as far as their message exchanges:
Individual messages may contain sophisticated information or knowledge
E.g., a message with an explanation of a diagnosis

Protocols are more complex

E.g., a many-party argumentation over fishing rights

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

How to do Things With Words

J.L. Austin
How To Do Things with Words (1962) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._L._Austin Speech acts can change the state of the world E.g., I pronounce you man and wife

Locutionary act
Act of making an utterance E.g., Shut the door!.

Illocutionary act
Action performed in saying something E.g., He told me to shut the door.

Perlocution
The effect of the act E.g., He caused me to shut the door.

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Background: Speech Acts

John Searle (1969), Speech Acts
Home page: http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~jsearle/ Extended Austins theory:
Properties required for a speech act to succeed

Wikipedias entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_Act

For an imperative:
Normal I/O conditions state that the hearer is able to hear the request, the act was performed in normal circumstances. Preparatory conditions state what must be true for this speech act to be effective, e.g., the hearer must be capable of the action requested, and the speaker must believe the hearer can do it. Sincerity conditions state, for example, that the speaker really does want the action performed.
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Searle: Types of Speech Acts

Representatives:
Commits speaker to the truth of an expressed proposition

Directives:
Attempt to get the hearer to do something (an imperative)

Commissives:
Commits the speaker to some course of action

Expressive:
Express some psychological state

Declaratives:
Causes a change in an institutional state of affairs
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Agent Communication Languages

Agents exchange messages expressed in an Agent Communication Language (ACL)
Parties must agree (or be aware) of the syntax of individual messages

Most ACLs identify distinct kinds of messages

They represent the intention of the speaker

Examples:
Indicatives (representatives) The cat is on the mat. Imperatives (directives) Put the cat on the mat! Interrogatives Where is the cat?
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

Message Structure
Based on communicative acts (CAs), i.e., the performatives:
Illocutionary verbs, i.e., they describe the speakers intention ACL = CA + MSG

ACLs provide a mechanism for context:

sender, receiver, ontology, protocol, etc.
Message expressed in some Agent Communication Language Sender: Agent-name Receiver: Agent-name Message content expressed in a content language, refers to an ontology

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

KQML
Knowledge Query Manipulation Language
Wikipedias entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Query_and_Manipulation _Language

Developed in the early 1990s Originally conceived as an interface to KBSs

Repurposed as an ACL

Web site: http://www.cs.umbc.edu/kqml/

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

10

KQML ACL
KQML messages are of the form
(performative :sender S :receiver R :language L :ontology O :in-reply-to I1 :reply-with I2 :content K )

For example:
(ask-one :sender shopper :receiver amazon-agent :language prolog :ontology book-ontology :in-reply-to advert1234 :reply-with q321 :content book(How to do things with words,Austin,Price) )
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

11

KQML (Informal) Semantics

In 1997 KQML had 35 performatives, including:
S wants to know if K is in Rs KB S wants to know all instantiations of K that are true S wants one instantiation of K that is true in Rs KB K is in Ss KB S asks R to add K to its KB S wants R to know that S can process K S wants R to provide one response to K (some agent other than R is going to provide the response) S wants R to provide all responses to K (some agents broker-all other than R are going to provide the responses) recommend-one S wants to learn of an agent who can respond to K recommend-all S wants to learn of all agents who can respond to K

ask-if ask-all ask-one tell insert advertise broker-one

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

12

KQML Facilitation
KQML performatives divided into groups: Discourse: ask-one/all, ask-if, tell, insert, Facilitation: advertise, broker-one/all, recommendone/all Mechanics: low-level stuff like IP address registration Facilitator agent to handle facilitation performatives. Usually involving nested KQML messages:
(advertise :sender amazon-agent :receiver facilitator42 :language KQML :ontology KQML-ontology :content (ask-one :sender amazon-agent :receiver facilitator42 :language prolog :ontology book-ontology :reply-with advert1234 :content book(Title,Author,Price) ) )
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

13

Recommend-Style Facilitation
Conversation for recommend-style facilitation:
1.Agent A advertises to broker B that it can supply K 2.Originator O requests recommendation from B for a supplier of K 3.B sends O advertisement that A can supply K 4.O asks A a query Q concerning K. 5.A tells O some information I in response to Q.
4. ask Q

O
2. recommend K?

5. tell I 3. advertise K

A
1. advertise K

Advantage: O can cache advert message for later reuse

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

14

Broker-Style Facilitation
Alternative style of brokerage: middleperson
1.A advertises to B that it can supply K, as before. 2.O requests B to act as broker for a query Q. 3.B determines that Q concerns K, so asks Q to A. 4.A tells B a response I to Q. 5.B tells I to O.
O
5. tell I 1. advertise K 2. broker Q 4. tell I

A
3. ask Q

Advantage: only agent O needs to know the broker

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

15

FIPA ACL
The Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents
Standards organisation promoting agent-based technology Goal: interoperability of standards with other technologies Web site: http://www.fipa.org

The FIPA ACL

Open standard described at http://www.fipa.org/specs/fipa00061/SC00061G.pdf Based on ARCOL (Sadek) & KQML

Content
content languages FIPA SL, constraint language, KIF, RDF.

FIPA interaction protocols

Conversations to achieve some interaction or effect; e.g. auction, contract net, negotiation.

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

16

FIPA: Message Structure

FIPA-ACL messages consist of the following parameters:
Parameter Description performative type of communicative act sender identity of agent sending the message receiver identity of intended recipient of message id of agent to which subsequent messages reply-to should be directed content object of the communicative action language syntax of the content of the message

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

17

FIPA: Message Structure (Contd)

Parameter Description encoding specific encoding of content expression ontology semantics (meaning) of content protocol interaction protocol of which message is part conversation unique identifier of the conversation -id reply-with identifier (local to this conversation) for the response to this message in-reply-to identifier of the message this is a response to reply-by deadline for the reply
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

18

Message Structure (Contd)

Only mandatory element is performative
However, most messages will also have at least the sender, receiver and content

If an agent is unable to process one or more element of a message, it must respond with not-understood
An agent that complies with FIPA ACL must at least support not-understood

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

19

Sample Message
A request for a hotel booking:
(request :sender (:name dominicagent@whitestein.com:8080) :receiver (:name rexhotel@tcp://hotelrex.com:6600) :ontology personaltravelassistant :language FIPA-SL :protocol fipa-request :content (action movenpickhotel@tcp://movenpick.com:6600 (bookhotel (:arrival 25/11/2000) (:departure 05/12/2000) ...)) )

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

20

Another example: Inform

Summary:
Sender informs receiver that something is true

Message Content: a fact Description the sending agent:

1. Believes that some fact is true, 2. Intends that the receiving agent also comes to believe that the fact is true, and, 3. Does not already believe that receiver has any knowledge of the truth of the fact.

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

21

Another example: Inform (Contd)

Sending agent is sincere
Has (somehow) generated the intention that the receiver should know the fact.

Last property concerns semantic soundness of the act:

If an agent knows already that some state of the world holds (that the receiver knows fact p), THEN It cannot rationally adopt an intention to bring about that state of the world A rational agent X should never adopt an intention to tell Y something that X knows that Y already knows
peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

22

Another example: Inform (Contd)

From the receiver's viewpoint, receiving an inform message entitles it to believe that:
The sender believes the fact contained in the message, and, The sender wishes the receiver to believe that fact also

Whether or not receiver adopts the belief in the fact will be determined by the receivers trust in the sincerity and reliability of the sender

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

23

Other Performatives
FIPA Communicative Act Library Specification Includes:
request an agent to perform some action query (ask a question) propose a deal during negotiation accept-proposal to commit to an agreement reject-proposal to terminate negotiation without agreement etc.

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

24

FIPA ACL and JADE

JADE: FIPA-compliant platform Incorporates FIPA ACL
Functionalities to assemble and parse messages in FIPA-ACL Pushing a standard onto industry

peer-to-peer and agent-based computing

25