Agent-Oriented Software Engineering VIII: 8th International Workshop, AOSE 2007, Honolulu, HI, USA, May 14, 2007, Revised Selected Papers

236 Pages·2008·8.184 MB·English

by  Juan C. Garcia-Ojeda, Scott A. DeLoach, Robby, Walamitien H. Oyenan, Jorge Valenzuela (auth.), Michael Luck, Lin Padgham (eds.)

Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4951
CommencedPublicationin1973
FoundingandFormerSeriesEditors:
GerhardGoos,JurisHartmanis,andJanvanLeeuwen
EditorialBoard
DavidHutchison
LancasterUniversity,UK
TakeoKanade
CarnegieMellonUniversity,Pittsburgh,PA,USA
JosefKittler
UniversityofSurrey,Guildford,UK
JonM.Kleinberg
CornellUniversity,Ithaca,NY,USA
AlfredKobsa
UniversityofCalifornia,Irvine,CA,USA
FriedemannMattern
ETHZurich,Switzerland
JohnC.Mitchell
StanfordUniversity,CA,USA
MoniNaor
WeizmannInstituteofScience,Rehovot,Israel
OscarNierstrasz
UniversityofBern,Switzerland
C.PanduRangan
IndianInstituteofTechnology,Madras,India
BernhardSteffen
UniversityofDortmund,Germany
MadhuSudan
MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,MA,USA
DemetriTerzopoulos
UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,CA,USA
DougTygar
UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,CA,USA
GerhardWeikum
Max-PlanckInstituteofComputerScience,Saarbruecken,Germany
Michael Luck Lin Padgham (Eds.)
Agent-Oriented
Software
Engineering VIII
8th International Workshop, AOSE 2007
Honolulu, HI, USA, May 14, 2007
Revised Selected Papers
1 3
VolumeEditors
MichaelLuck
King’sCollegeLondon,DepartmentofComputerScience
Strand,LondonWC2R2LS,UK
E-mail:[email protected]
LinPadgham
RMITUniversity,SchoolofComputerScienceandInformationTechnology
Melbourne,VIC3001,Australia
E-mail:[email protected]
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2008925093
CRSubjectClassification(1998):D.2,I.2.11,F.3,D.1,C.2.4,D.3
LNCSSublibrary:SL2–ProgrammingandSoftwareEngineering
ISSN 0302-9743
ISBN-10 3-540-79487-5SpringerBerlinHeidelbergNewYork
ISBN-13 978-3-540-79487-5SpringerBerlinHeidelbergNewYork
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.Allrightsarereserved,whetherthewholeorpartofthematerialis
concerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,re-useofillustrations,recitation,broadcasting,
reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherway,andstorageindatabanks.Duplicationofthispublication
orpartsthereofispermittedonlyundertheprovisionsoftheGermanCopyrightLawofSeptember9,1965,
initscurrentversion,andpermissionforusemustalwaysbeobtainedfromSpringer.Violationsareliable
toprosecutionundertheGermanCopyrightLaw.
SpringerisapartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia
springer.com
©Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2008
PrintedinGermany
Typesetting:Camera-readybyauthor,dataconversionbyScientificPublishingServices,Chennai,India
Printedonacid-freepaper SPIN:12262915 06/3180 543210
Preface
The concept of an agent as an autonomous system, capable of interacting with
other agents in order to satisy its design objectives, is a natural one for soft-
ware designers. Just as we can understand many systems as being composed of
essentially passive objects, which have state, and upon which we can perform
operations, so we can understand many others as being made up of interacting,
semi-autonomousagents.Thisparadigmisespeciallysuitedtocomplexsystems.
Software architectures that contain many dynamically interacting components,
eachwiththeirownthreadofcontrol,andengagingincomplexcoordinationpro-
tocols,aretypicallyordersofmagnitudemorecomplextocorrectlyandefficiently
engineerthanthosethatsimplycomputeafunctionofsomeinputthroughasin-
gle thread of control, or through a limited set of stricly synchronized threads
of control. Agent-oriented modelling techniques are especially useful in such
applications.
Many current and emerging real-world applications—spanning scenarios as
diverseasworldwidecomputing,networkenterprises,ubiquitouscomputing,sen-
sor networks, just to mention a few examples—have exactly the above charac-
teristics. As a consequence, agent-oriented software engineering has become an
importantarea:bothasadesignmodellingtool,andasaninterfacetoplatforms
which include specialized infrastructure support for programming in terms of
semi-autonomous interacting processes. The workshop was aimed at providing
a forum for discussion and debate over just these concerns.
Building on the success of the seven previous workshops, the Eighth Inter-
national Workshopon Agent-OrientedSoftware Engineering (AOSE 2007)took
place in Honolulu in May 2007 as part of the Sixth International Joint Confer-
ence on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2007).Papers
were reviewed by three members of an international Program Committee of 23
researchers and by 5 auxiliary reviewers.
This volume contains revised and improved versions of the papers presented
at the workshop, together with papers resulting from discussions on tools and
platforms.Itisorganizedinfoursections:methodologyandprocesses;interacting
heterogeneous agents; system development issues; tools and case studies.
1 AOSE Methodology and Processes
The first section begins with a paper by Garcia-Ojeda et al., in which they
describe the organization-based multiagent system engineering (O-MaSE) pro-
cess framework that aims at helping process engineers create customized agent-
orientedsoftwaredevelopmentprocesses.O-MaSEisbuiltontheMaSEmethod-
ology and adapted from the OPEN Process Framework (OPF), which adopts a
methodengineeringapproachtoprocessconstruction.O-MaSEconsistsofthree
VI Preface
basic structures: a metamodel, which defines the key concepts needed to de-
sign and implement multiagent systems; a set of methods fragments, which are
operationsor tasksthat areexecuted to produce a set ofworkproducts, includ-
ing models, documents, or code; and a set of guidelines, which define how the
methodfragmentsarerelatedtoeachother.Theworkisillustratedbyproviding
examples of creating such custom O-MaSE processes.
Continuing the theme, in the second paper, Gonzalez-Palaciosand Luck de-
scribe workontrying to gainacceptancein industrialenvironments,which they
argue is limited in part by drawbacks in current agent-oriented methodologies,
mainly in terms of applicability and comprehensiveness. For example, while the
Gaia methodology is based on organizationalabstractions (which makes it suit-
ableforthedesignofcomplexsystems),andoffersasimpleandneutralmethod-
ologicalprocess that facilitates extensions, it neither considers agent design nor
offers an iterative methodological process.Gonzalez-Palaciosand Luck describe
their efforts to addressthis by extending Gaiato include anagentdesignphase,
and an enhanced methodological process that uses iterations.
Inthethirdpaper,Milesetal.focusontheissueofmakingsurethatsoftware
designs include appropriate means for ensuring the quality of the processes in-
volved.Whiletheproductsofsystemscannotalwaysbejudgedatfacevalue,the
processbywhichtheywereobtainedisalsoimportant.Forinstance,therigorof
ascientificexperiment,theethicswithwhichanitemwasmanufacturedandthe
use of services with particular licensing all affect how the results of those pro-
cessesarevalued.Theissueofensuringthatusersareabletochecktheseprocess
qualities is a softwareengineeringone:the developer mustdecide to ensure that
adequate data are recorded regarding processes and safeguards implemented to
ensure accuracy. Yet in situations in which there are multiple independent con-
tributory organizations, the ability of autonomous agents to choose how their
goals or responsibilities are achieved can hide such process qualities from users.
In response, Miles et al. introduce AgentPrIMe, an adjunct to existing agent-
orientedmethodologiestoallowsystemdesignstobeadaptedsoastogiveusers
confidence in the results they generate, through documentation, corroboration,
independent storage and accountability.
The next paper, by Morandini et al., addresses the problems arising from
system operation in complex, heterogeneous environments, with different sys-
tem users, each with different needs and preferences. They argue that software
engineering methodologies need to cope with the complexity of requirements
specificationinsuchscenarios,wherenewrequirementsmayemergealsoatrun-
time and the systems goals are expected to evolve to meet new stakeholder
needs. The proposed solution is to take an agent-oriented approach in the de-
velopment of methods and techniques for the design of adaptive and evolvable
information systems able to fulfill stakeholder objectives. Based on earlier work
on a framework for the design and code of system specifications in terms of
goal models, with a tool supported process that exploits the Tropos method-
ology JADE/Jadex, they describe how to develop a system using an iterative
Preface VII
process, where the system execution allows the system specification to be en-
riched through goal models.
Finally, Nguyen et al. are concerned with a distinct aspect of software engi-
neering:testing. As complex distributedagent-orientedsystems areincreasingly
being applied in mission-critical services, assurances need to be given that they
operate properly. Although the relevance of the link between requirements en-
gineering and testing has long been understood, current AOSE methodologies
onlypartiallyaddressit.Whilesomeofferspecification-basedformalverification,
allowingsoftwaredeveloperstocorrecterrorsatthestartofthedevelopmentpro-
cess, others exploit object-oriented testing techniques, mapping agent-oriented
abstractions into object constructs. However, a structured testing process for
AOSE methodologies that complements formal verification is still missing. In
response, Nguyen et al. introduce a testing framework for Tropos that includes
atesting processmodelcomplementing the agent-orientedrequirementsandde-
signmodelsandstrengtheningthemutualrelationshipbetweengoalanalysisand
testing. They argue that this framework provides a systematic way of deriving
test cases from goal analysis, termed goal-oriented testing.
2 Interacting Heterogeneous Agents
The second section is concerned with software engineering in the context of
interactingheterogeneousagents.Asapreludetotheotherpapersinthissection,
Dignum et al. introduce and discuss some key issues in relation to open agent
systems. In particular, if electronic institutions are Internet-based facilities in
which agents can interact, thus forming truly open agent systems, these agents
need to be able to determine whether an institution is one in which they can
participate. Their solution is to use a layered approach in which, starting with
a basic compatibility of message types, each extra layer ensures a higher degree
of compatibility, but also requires extra sophistication.
According to German and Sheremetov, in the second paper, interaction en-
gineering is a key issue in the effective construction of multi-agent systems,
requiring software abstractions, components and control structures to manage
interactionsamongagentsandtoimproveinfrastructuresatruntime.Insupport
oftheseaims,theydescribeaframeworkfortheautomaticprocessingofinterac-
tionsgeneratedusingFIPA-ACL,andincludingthreeparts:anagentinteraction
architecture to systematize interaction processing tasks; interaction models to
buildreusablevalidatedcodeforcheckingdifferentphasesofinteractionprocess-
ing associated with message semantics; and components and control structures
for a particular agent platform. They also outline the implementation details
of the proposed approach within the CAPNET agent platform and illustrate it
with examples.
In a rather different vein, Bogdanovych et al. describe work on considering
virtual worlds as open multi-agent systems with a new 3D Electronic Institu-
tionsmethodologyfortheirdevelopment.Inthissense,3DElectronicInstitutions
VIII Preface
are virtual worlds with normative regulation of interactions. The methodology
proposed helps to separate the development of such virtual worlds into two
independent phases: specification of the institutional rules; and design of the
3D interaction environment. It also offers a set of graphical tools that support
the development process at each stage from specification to deployment. The
resultingsystemfacilitatestheincorporationofhumansintomulti-agentsystems
through participation as avatars in the 3D environment, and interacting with
other humans or software agents, while the institution ensures the validity of
their interactions.
3 System Development Issues
The third section of the book is concerned with agent systems development.
In the first paper, Asnar et al. consider the role of risk in safety-critical agent-
orientedapplications.Currently,deliberationinagentarchitectures(particularly
BDI)doesnotincludeanyformofriskanalysis.Inresponse,theyproposeguide-
lines for goal-risk reasoning in Tropos so that the overall set of possible plans
is evaluated with respect to risk. When the level of risk is too high, agents can
consider and introduce additional plans, called treatments, which produce an
overall reduction of risk, but may have side effects. Asnar et al. illustrate their
model with a case study on the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle agent.
The second paper, by Dam and Winikoff, deals with one of the most critical
problemsinsoftwaremaintenanceandevolution,propagatingchanges.Although
many approaches have been proposed, automated change propagation is still
a significant technical challenge in software engineering. Their work provides
anagent-orientedchangepropagationframeworkbasedonfixing inconsistencies
whenprimarychangesaremadetodesignmodels.Acorepieceoftheframework
is a new method for generating repair plans from OCL constraints that restrict
these models.
Finally, in the last paper of this section, Taveter and Sterling describe how
prototype systems can be efficiently created from agent-oriented domain and
design models, through a conceptual space that accommodates model transfor-
mations described by the model-driven architecture. They argue that the ap-
proach has the potential to further speed up and automate the process of fast
prototyping, complementing other agent-oriented approaches.
4 Tools and Case Studies
The last section of the book is concerned with tools and case studies. As is
indicated in the first paper, which functions as a brief introduction, this section
resulted from a call for alternative agent-oriented designs of a common system,
allowing for a more direct comparison between methodologies, and also from a
callfordemonstrationsofAOSEtools.Theresultisasetofpapersthatprovides
a valuable resource for the community—namely, a set of designs using different
methodologies, for the well-known conference management system example.
Preface IX
We believe that this volume providesa combinationof cutting-edge research
papersinagent-orientedsoftwareengineeringandanimportantreferenceforthe
development and comparison of new and existing methodologies.
October 2007 Michael Luck
Lin Padgham
Organization
Organizing Committee
Michael Luck (Co-chair)
Department of Computer Science
King’s College London, UK
E-mail: [email protected]
Lin Padgham(Co-chair)
School of CS and IT
RMIT University, Australia
E-mail: [email protected]
Steering Committee
Paolo Ciancarini, University of Bologna
Michael Wooldridge, University of Liverpool
Joerg Mueller, Siemens
Gerhard Weiss, Software Competence Center Hagenberg GmbH
Program Committee
Claudio Bartolini (USA) Juergen Lind (Germany)
Federico Bergenti (Italy) Simon Miles (UK)
Carole Bernon (France) Haris Mouratidis (UK)
Giacomo Cabri (Italy) Andrea Omicini (Italy)
Paolo Ciancarini (Italy) Juan Pavon (Spain)
Massimo Cossentino (Italy) Anna Perini (Italy)
Keith Decker (USA) Fariba Sadri (UK)
Scott DeLoach (USA) Arnon Sturm (Israel)
Klaus Fischer (Germany) John Thangarajah(Australia)
Paolo Giorgini (Italy) Michael Winikoff (Australia)
Jorge Gomez Sanz (Spain) Eric Yu (Canada)
Gaya Jayatilleke (Australia)
Auxiliary Reviewers
James Atlas Ambra Molesini Cu Nguyen
Sachin Kamboj Alberto Siena
Table of Contents
I AOSE Methodology and Processes
O-MaSE: A Customizable Approach to Developing Multiagent
Development Processes ........................................... 1
Juan C. Garcia-Ojeda, Scott A. DeLoach, Robby,
Walamitien H. Oyenan, and Jorge Valenzuela
Extending Gaia with Agent Design and Iterative Development......... 16
Jorge Gonzalez-Palacios and Michael Luck
AgentPrIMe: Adapting MAS Designs to Build Confidence............. 31
Simon Miles, Paul Groth, Steve Munroe, Michael Luck, and
Luc Moreau
Refining Goal Models by Evaluating System Behaviour ............... 44
Mirko Morandini, Loris Penserini, Anna Perini, and Angelo Susi
A Goal-Oriented Software Testing Methodology...................... 58
Duy Cu Nguyen, Anna Perini, and Paolo Tonella
II Interacting Heterogeneous Agents
Open Agent Systems ???.......................................... 73
Frank Dignum, Virginia Dignum, John Thangarajah,
Lin Padgham, and Michael Winikoff
An Agent Framework for Processing FIPA-ACL Messages Based on
Interaction Models ............................................... 88
Ernesto German and Leonid Sheremetov
A Methodology for Developing Multiagent Systems as 3D Electronic
Institutions ..................................................... 103
Anton Bogdanovych, Marc Esteva, Simeon Simoff,
Carles Sierra, and Helmut Berger
III System Development Issues
Reasoning About Risk in Agent’s Deliberation Process: A Jadex
Implementation.................................................. 118
Yudistira Asnar, Paolo Giorgini, and Nicola Zannone