Marc Esteva (IIIA)Eva Onaindia (UPV)

Sascha Ossowski (URJC)Enric Plaza (IIIA)

Juan Antonio Rodríguez (IIIA)

WP3: Organisations

www.agreement-technologies.org

WP3: Organisations

WP1

9% WP2

8%

WP321%

WP4

16%

WP5

7%

WP6

12%

WP7

11%

WP8

10%

WP9

2%

WP10

4%

WP1

WP2

WP3

WP4

WP5

WP6

WP7

WP8

WP9

WP10

Topics addressed:• Organisation-centric point of view: How to design / learn, instantiate

and evolve complex org. structures ?

• Agent-centric point of view: How to act alone / as part of a team within complex org. structures?

• User-centric point of view: How to assure the usability of complex org. structures?

WP3: Organisations

Tasks:

• T3.1: Autonomic Electronic Institutions

• T3.2: Group Planning

• T3.3: Deliberative Agreement

• T3.4: 3D Electronic Institutions

• T3.5: Organisational Teamwork

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Task 3.1 Task 3.2 Task 3.3 Task 3.4 Task 3.5

IIIA UPV URJC

Management:

• Identify interrelations between WP3 tasks

• so as to avoid duplication of work/ identify synergies

Juan Antonio Rodríguez Aguilar (IIIA)

Autonomic Electronic Institutions

www.agreement-technologies.org

Task 3.1

Autonomic Electronic Institutions

• Introduction: Aims and scope

• Activities

• Planning

Overview

Introduction

• Research issue: How to endow an agent organisation or institution with autonomic capabilities to yield a dynamical answer to changing circumstances through the adaptation of its norms.

• « An autonomic computing system must configure and reconfigure itself under varying (and even unpredictable) conditions. System configuration or "setup" must occur automatically, as well as dynamic adjustments to that configuration to best handle changing environments. »

Introduction

• Example: Supply chain automationTier 3

Raw MaterialsTier 2

Fabrication

Tier 1Comp. Assbly

VehicleAssembly

MixingCenter

Dealers

Activities

• Negotiation models and strategies for self-configuration– Flexible negotiation models to reach agreements on

the fly to respond to new goals

• Connections: – Task 3.5 in WP3– Input: Techniques from WP2 and WP4– Output: eProcurement demonstrator in WP8

• Background: Work at IIIA on supply chain formation

• Current team: Jesús Cerquides, Jar

Activities

• Learning norm reconfiguration mechanisms in cooperative and competitive scenarios – to agree on how to respond to changing circumstances

• Connections:– Task 3.5 in WP3– Output: eProcurement demonstrator in WP8

• Background: Results of TIN project on “Autonomic Electronic Institutions

• Current team:– N.Salazar, J.L.Arcos, Jar: Evolutionary approach– J.L.Fernández, J.L.Arcos: Under construction– M.Vinyals, J.Cerquides, Jar: Under construction

Plan

 Activity M0 M6 M12 M18 M24 M30

             

Negotiation models for norm agreement            

             

Empirical evaluation (configuration models)            

             

Learning models for reconfiguration            

             

Empirical evaluation (reconfiguration models)            

Eva Onaindia (UPV)

Agreement Planning

www.agreement-technologies.org

Task 3.2

Task 3.2 Agreement planning

WP3: Organisations (Leader: Sascha Ossowski – URJC) Task 3.1. Autonomic Electronic Institutions.)Task 3.2: Agreement Planning (DESIGN, ORGANIZATION,

MODEL)Task 3.3. Deliberative Agreement: social choice and collective judgment models for open MAS Task 3.4 3D Electronic Institutions (3DEI) Task 3.5: Mechanisms for Efficient Organisational Teamwork

WP4: Argumentation and negotiation (Leader: Lluís Godo – IIIA) Task 4.1. Agreement LogicsTask 4.2. Real-Time agreements Task 4.3. CBR-based Mediating AgentTask 4.4 Planning and scheduling capabilities for an agent (SOLVING TECHNIQUES, COMPUTATION)Task 4.5 Agreement management with Data Mining

What is agreement planning?

Planning by negotiation or Negotiation by planning?

1. Planning is the problem, negotiation is the technique (new planning framework)

2. Negotiation is the problem, planning is the method (traditional view of planning for solving a particular problem)

Planning decisions = agreements

• Which (actions … different alternatives)

• When (temporal allocation of actions)

• How (resources)

• And also …– Negotiation cycle + planning + execution– Time to reach the agreements (planning time)– ….

Where planning meets negotiation?PLANNING NEGOTIATION

AGENTS Single-agent Multiple planning entities (humans, soft agents, …)

Collaborative frameworkDistributed planningMulti-agent planning

KNOWLEDGE Perfect knowledge Global knowledge/Partial knowledgeSharable / Private / HiddenDistributed planning

GOALS Joint goals Joint goals collaborative work, joint negotiation for a common global purpose

Independent goals collaborative work, individual negotiation for individual interests

Single-agent goal collaborative work (??)Independent goals collaborative +

individual work (do one’s own thing)

OPTIMIZATION Time, resources Negotiation elements

Task 3.2: Workplan

• Project report:– D3.2.1: Group planning agreements M36

• Our proposal: Study the relation between planning and negotiation– M8: Analysis and identification of components

• Agents, Knowledge, Goals, Optimization• Survey

– M12: Discussion with “negotiation” people• Planning needs introduced by negotiation• Planning agreements between agents

Enric Plaza (IIIA)

Deliberative Agreement

www.agreement-technologies.org

Task 3.3

Task 3.3. Deliberative Agreement: social choice and collective judgment models for open MAS

Objectives. The overall goal of this task is to analyze properties and develop mechanisms for collective decision making in human and artificial agents. The emphasis will be on tasks that require complex agreements, i.e. involving at least one of the following: (i) argumentation processes for deliberation, (ii) aggregation of sets of interconnected judgments or (iii) organizational division of labour.

Technologies. This goal requires the integration of relevant contributions in social choice theory, argumentation models, aggregation procedures, organizational and institutional models.

Task 3.3. Deliberative Agreement: social choice and collective judgment models for open MAS

Deliverable D3.3.1 Requirement analysis for deliberative agreement. Month 12

Requirement Analysis: Study of relevant aspects in social choice theory, argumentation models, aggregation procedures, and organizational and institutional models.

Year 1

Focus: while social choice models typically focus on aggregating individual preferences, we will focus on judgment aggregation.

Judgment aggregation is new field that aims at finding collective judgments on logically interconnected propositions.

Aggregation procedures for interconnected judgments. Month 24

Deliberation and aggregation for interconnected judgments. Month 40

Institutional models for deliberative agreement Month 54

Years 2-5

Task 3.3. Deliberative Agreement: social choice and collective judgment models for open MAS

As an example of application, we consider the management of a common resource, namely the aquifers of a region, and the joint decision is whether or not a shortage of water for consumption is likely (e.g. to implement a ruling that changed the normal exploitation regime to a restricted exploitation regime)

Any group that attempts to manage a common resource (e.g., aquifers, judicial systems, pastures) for optimal sustainable production must solve a set of problems in order to create institutions for collective action.

Task 3.3. Deliberative Agreement: social choice and collective judgment models for open MAS

Interconnected causal judgments.

Marc Esteva (IIIA)

3D Electronic Institutions

www.agreement-technologies.org

Task 3.4

23

T3.4 3D Electronic Institutions

Electronic Institutions•Structured Interactions•Strong methodology•Guarantees that participants comply with

institutional rules and fulfill their obligations

3D Virtual Worlds•Social•Personalized experience•Location awareness

•Unstructured interactionsNo methodological support

3D Electronic Institutions•Social•Structured, regulated interactions

T3.4 3D EI Example

T3.4 Goal

• Facilitate the integration (participation) of humans

into MAS.

– Graphical visualization of norms and interaction

context

– Humans and software agents collaboration.

• Extending the application domains of Virtual

Worlds

T3.4 Goal

• Definition of a methodology for the construction of 3D

Electronic Institutions:

– specification of institutional rules

– design and development of the Virtual World

• Development of algorithms and software tools to support

the methodology

• Autonomic 3D Electronic Institutions

T3.4 Run Time Architecture

T3.4 3D EI

• In collaboration with the University of

Technology Sydney, University of Western

Sydney and University of Barcelona.

• New PhD student: Tomas Trescak (co-

supervised with Inmaculada Rodriguez)

29

T3.4 WorkPlan

• Goal: development of the execution environment for 3DEI.

– T1. Study of available Virtual Worlds Clients and selection of what

to use in this project. Definition of 3DEI in the representation

language of the chosen VW client. (Feb - May 2008).

– T2. Adaptation of the map generation algorithm (Jun - Jul 2008)

– T3. Implementation of the Causal Connection Server to connect

AMELI with the chosen VW Client (Jul – Oct 2008)

– T4 Deployment and testing of the system (Oct 2008 – Jan 2009)

– T5. Norm and Context Visualization (Nov 2008 – Jan 2009)

Sascha Ossowski (URJC)

Mechanisms for Efficient Organisational Teamwork

www.agreement-technologies.org

Task 3.5

Task 3.5: Characteristics

Objectives (DoW):• to study how organizational structures can improve and accelerate

co-ordination processes in open environments.• to study the effect of organizational regulation on the quality and

flexibility of teamwork

Activities (DoW):• Design and implementation of micro-level mechanisms• Design and implementation of macro-level mechanisms

Deliverables (DoW): :• D3.5.1 : Design and analysis of organisational structures. M18.• D3.5.2 : Micro-level mechanisms M24.• D3.5.3 : Macro-level mechanisms M40.• D3.5.4 : Implementation of mechanisms. M54.

Task 3.5: Previous work

Organisational structures:

• Decision making in teamwork Social dependence networks Mapping to bargaining theory

• Abstraction for design/specification Model MAS/DPS structures in terms of roles, interactions, etc. Specify dynamics in terms of role-playing relations etc.

• Similarity measure for trust models Determine confidence in similar roles etc. (e.g. for bootstrapping)

• Service descriptions in SOMAS Role-based matchmaking Service composition filters

Task 3.5: Research lines

Challenges regarding organisational structures:

• Ch1: Language – Beyond roles and interaction hierarchies

• Ch2: Model – Design vs. learning of organisational structures

• Ch3: Exploitation – Beyond partner selection in two-sided interactions

Activities:

• A1: Study of complex org structure models (Ch1)

• A2: Learning (extensions of) org. ontologies (Ch2)

• A3: Implications for teamwork planning: trust, filtering, … (Ch3)

• A4: Org. structures for Probability Collectives (Ch3)

• A5: Effect of run-time org. information on the efficiency of teamwork (Ch3)

• A6: Adapt/extend simulation environments (Ch2+3)

Task 3.5: Workplan

 Activity M0 M6 M12 M18 M24 M30

             

A1: Study of complex org structure models            

A2: Learning org. ontologies              

A3: Implications for teamwork planning            

A4: Org. structures for Prob. Collectives            

A5: Effect of run-time org. information            

A6: Simulation environments              

           

Task 3.5: Relation to other WPs/Tasks

“Strong”:

• T3.2: Group Planning (Eva Onaindia)

• T6.1: Design of a MAS methodology based on org. concepts (C.A. Iglesias)

• WP5: Trust (Carles Sierra)

• T1.3: Scalable Methods for Semantic Service Coordination (Alberto Fernández)

“Medium”:

• T3.3: Deliberative Agreement (Enric Plaza).

• T3.1: Autonomic Electronic Institutions (Juan Antonio Rodriguez)

• T2.2: Individual Reasoning over normative systems (Pablo Noriega)

• T2.3: Declarative Specification of EIs (Marc Esteva)

Other

• WP6+7: Tools + Infrastructure

Marc Esteva (IIIA)Eva Onaindia (UPV)

Sascha Ossowski (URJC)Enric Plaza (IIIA)

Juan Antonio Rodríguez (IIIA)

WP3: Organisations

www.agreement-technologies.org