Exploitation du terrain commun pour la production d'expressions référentielles dans les systèmes de dialogue

National audienceCet article présente un moyen de contraindre la production d'expressions référentielles par un système de dialogue en fonction du terrain commun. Cette capacité, fondamentale pour atteindre la compréhension mutuelle, est trop souvent oubliée dans les systèmes de dialogue. Le modèle que nous proposons s'appuie sur une modélisation du processus d'ancrage (grounding process) en proposant un raffinement du statut d'ancrage appliqué à la description des référents. Il décrit quand et comment ce statut doit être révisé en fonction des jugements de compréhension des deux participants ainsi que son influence dans le choix d'une description partagée destinée à la génération d'une expression référentielle

Anchoring Institutions in Agents\u27 Attitudes: Towards a Logical Framework for Autonomous Multi-Agent Systems

The aim of this paper is to provide a logical framework for the specification of autonomous Multi-Agent Systems (MAS). A MAS is autonomous in so far as it is capable of binding (?nomos?) itself (?auto?) independently of any external normative constraint specified by a designer. In particular, a MAS is autonomous if it is able to maintain its social institutions (i.e. rule-governed social practices) only by way of the agents? attitudes. In order to specify an autonomous MAS, we propose the logic AL (Acceptance Logic) in which the acceptance of a proposition by the agents qua group members (i.e. group acceptance) is introduced. Such propositions are true w.r.t. an institutional context and correspond to facts that are instituted in an attitude-dependent way (i.e. normative and institutional facts). Finally, we contend that the present approach paves the way for a foundation of legal institutions, for studying the interaction between social and legal institutions and, eventually, for understanding and modeling institutional change

Logics of knowledge and action: critical analysis and challenges

International audienceWe overview the most prominent logics of knowledge and action that were proposed and studied in the multiagent systems literature. We classify them according to these two dimensions, knowledge and action, and moreover introduce a distinction between individual knowledge and group knowledge, and between a nonstrategic an a strategic interpretation of action operators. For each of the logics in our classification we highlight problematic properties. They indicate weaknesses in the design of these logics and call into question their suitability to represent knowledge and reason about it. This leads to a list of research challenges

Improving Knowledge Management Programs Using Marginal Utility in a Metric Space Generated by Conceptual Graphs

Knowledge management has emerged as a field of endeavor that blends a systems approach with methods drawn from organizational management and learning. In contrast, knowledge representation, a branch of artificial intelligence, is grounded in formal methods. Research in the separate behavioral and the structural disciplines – knowledge management and knowledge engineering - has not traditionally cross-pollinated. This has prevented the development of many practical practices useful in organizations. Organization managers - line and senior - lack guidance in where to direct improvement efforts targeted at specific groups of company knowledge workers. Demonstrated here is Knowledge Improvement Measurement Space (KIMS), a model providing a solution to that improvement problem. It employs marginal utility theory in a metric space, with formal reasoning via software agents realized in Sowa\u27s conceptual graphs, operating over a knowledge management conceptual structure. These components allow repeated evaluation of knowledge improvement measurements. Knowledge representation technology was applied to organize and encourage knowledge sharing, to achieve competitive advantage, and to measure progress toward that achievement. The KlMS reentrant process, a method of using the KIMS model, was shown to consist of metrics data calculated by executing joined conceptual graphs, consolidated into a distance variable to be estimated via a Minkowski metrics space. The metric space was shown to be equivalent to a marginal utility, which may be evaluated to determine the new level of knowledge capability. The procedure may be repeated until knowledge management goals are achieved. The solution took into account the body of knowledge related human understanding and learning, and formal methods of knowledge organization. These were shown to include surface ontologies based in a knowledge management program, principles of business strategy, and organizational learning. KIMS was validated through a demonstration based on empirical data collected over a five-year program in a large aerospace company during its progress in applying the Software Engineering Institute Capability Maturity Model

Grounding and the expression of belief

International audienceIn this paper we investigate the logic of speech acts and groundedness. A piece of information is grounded for a group of agents if it is publicly expressed and established by all agents of the group. Our concept of groundedness is founded on the expression of the sincerity condition of speech act theory. We formalize groundedness within an extended BDI (Belief, Desire, Intention) logic where belief is viewed as a kind of group belief. We show that our logic permits to reconcile the mentalist approaches on the one hand, and the structural and social approaches on the other, which are the two rival research programs in the formalization of agent interaction. Although groundedness is thus linked to the standard mental attitude of belief, it is immune to the critiques that have been put forward against the mentalist approaches, viz. that they require too strong hypotheses about the agents' mental states such as sincerity and cooperation: just as the structural approaches, groundedness only bears on the public aspect of communication. In our extended BDI logic we study communication between heterogeneous agents. We characterize inform and request speech acts in terms of preconditions and effects. We demonstrate the power of our solution by means of two examples. First, we revisit the well-known FIPA Contract Net Protocol. As a second example, we show how Walton & Krabbe's commitments can be redefined in term of groundedness