KEMNAD: A Knowledge Engineering Methodology for Negotiating Agent Development

Automated negotiation is widely applied in various domains. However, the development of such systems is a complex knowledge and software engineering task. So, a methodology there will be helpful. Unfortunately, none of existing methodologies can offer sufficient, detailed support for such system development. To remove this limitation, this paper develops a new methodology made up of: (1) a generic framework (architectural pattern) for the main task, and (2) a library of modular and reusable design pattern (templates) of subtasks. Thus, it is much easier to build a negotiating agent by assembling these standardised components rather than reinventing the wheel each time. Moreover, since these patterns are identified from a wide variety of existing negotiating agents(especially high impact ones), they can also improve the quality of the final systems developed. In addition, our methodology reveals what types of domain knowledge need to be input into the negotiating agents. This in turn provides a basis for developing techniques to acquire the domain knowledge from human users. This is important because negotiation agents act faithfully on the behalf of their human users and thus the relevant domain knowledge must be acquired from the human users. Finally, our methodology is validated with one high impact system

Demand Response Strategy Based on Reinforcement Learning and Fuzzy Reasoning for Home Energy Management

As energy demand continues to increase, demand response (DR) programs in the electricity distribution grid are gaining momentum and their adoption is set to grow gradually over the years ahead. Demand response schemes seek to incentivise consumers to use green energy and reduce their electricity usage during peak periods which helps support grid balancing of supply-demand and generate revenue by selling surplus of energy back to the grid. This paper proposes an effective energy management system for residential demand response using Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Fuzzy Reasoning (FR). RL is considered as a model-free control strategy which learns from the interaction with its environment by performing actions and evaluating the results. The proposed algorithm considers human preference by directly integrating user feedback into its control logic using fuzzy reasoning as reward functions. Q-learning, a RL strategy based on a reward mechanism, is used to make optimal decisions to schedule the operation of smart home appliances by shifting controllable appliances from peak periods, when electricity prices are high, to off-peak hours, when electricity prices are lower without affecting the customer’s preferences. The proposed approach works with a single agent to control 14 household appliances and uses a reduced number of state-action pairs and fuzzy logic for rewards functions to evaluate an action taken for a certain state. The simulation results show that the proposed appliances scheduling approach can smooth the power consumption profile and minimise the electricity cost while considering user’s preferences, user’s feedbacks on each action taken and his/her preference settings. A user-interface is developed in MATLAB/Simulink for the Home Energy Management System (HEMS) to demonstrate the proposed DR scheme. The simulation tool includes features such as smart appliances, electricity pricing signals, smart meters, solar photovoltaic generation, battery energy storage, electric vehicle and grid supply.Peer reviewe

Agents for educational games and simulations

This book consists mainly of revised papers that were presented at the Agents for Educational Games and Simulation (AEGS) workshop held on May 2, 2011, as part of the Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS) conference in Taipei, Taiwan. The 12 full papers presented were carefully reviewed and selected from various submissions. The papers are organized topical sections on middleware applications, dialogues and learning, adaption and convergence, and agent applications

No Grice: Computers that Lie, Deceive and Conceal

In the future our daily life interactions with other people, with computers, robots and smart environments will be recorded and interpreted by computers or embedded intelligence in environments, furniture, robots, displays, and wearables. These sensors record our activities, our behavior, and our interactions. Fusion of such information and reasoning about such information makes it possible, using computational models of human behavior and activities, to provide context- and person-aware interpretations of human behavior and activities, including determination of attitudes, moods, and emotions. Sensors include cameras, microphones, eye trackers, position and proximity sensors, tactile or smell sensors, et cetera. Sensors can be embedded in an environment, but they can also move around, for example, if they are part of a mobile social robot or if they are part of devices we carry around or are embedded in our clothes or body. \ud \ud Our daily life behavior and daily life interactions are recorded and interpreted. How can we use such environments and how can such environments use us? Do we always want to cooperate with these environments; do these environments always want to cooperate with us? In this paper we argue that there are many reasons that users or rather human partners of these environments do want to keep information about their intentions and their emotions hidden from these smart environments. On the other hand, their artificial interaction partner may have similar reasons to not give away all information they have or to treat their human partner as an opponent rather than someone that has to be supported by smart technology.\ud \ud This will be elaborated in this paper. We will survey examples of human-computer interactions where there is not necessarily a goal to be explicit about intentions and feelings. In subsequent sections we will look at (1) the computer as a conversational partner, (2) the computer as a butler or diary companion, (3) the computer as a teacher or a trainer, acting in a virtual training environment (a serious game), (4) sports applications (that are not necessarily different from serious game or education environments), and games and entertainment applications