The document discusses norms and electronic institutions for regulating behavior in distributed systems, particularly for applications in e-contracting environments. It introduces a language for representing norms, discusses how norms can guide the behavior of normative agents, and how electronic institutions can provide safe environments for enforcing norms and coordinating agent interaction through the definition and enforcement of norms. It also discusses how contract-based approaches can provide governance in service-oriented architectures.
Apidays New York 2024 - APIs in 2030: The Risk of Technological Sleepwalk by ...
Norms Brmas08 V2
1. Norms and Electronic Institutions for Behaviour Regulation in Distributed Systems. Applications to eContracting Environments Javier Vázquez-Salceda April 1, 2008
8. Normative MAS: s tate of the Art (I) Agent-centric View Society-centric View Normative Level Descriptive Level Theoretical Approaches Practical Approaches 1 Ag. 2 Ag. Social Structures Single Agent One-to-One interactions ill-structured interactions Procedural Rules Concrete Abstract
9. Normative MAS: s tate of the Art (II) 3APL GAIA TROPOS EIDE E x:a A OperA [O, P, F] [E, G, H] Delliberative Normative Agents JACK, JADE, FIPA OS Normative Level Descriptive Level Procedural Rules Concrete Abstract 1 Ag. 2 Ag. Social Structures Single Agent One-to-One interactions ill-structured interactions
10.
11.
12.
13. Filling the gap too abstract and vague more concrete Laws, regulations Language for norms (Formal & Computational) Electronic Institutions Norm enforcement mechanisms Normative Agents Norms in delliberation cycle
14. Filling the gap Laws, regulations Operational Description (Operational, Computational) Electronic Institutions Norm enforcement mechanisms Normative Agents Norms in delliberation cycle too abstract and vague more concrete Normative Description (Deontic, Formal) Design guidance, Maintenance Traceability
30. Plan selection Plan execution Norm prohibitions delete actions from the set of options Norm obligations add actions to the set of options and may define some priorities or precedence Norms and Agents (IX)
36. Example O ONT ( appropriate(distribution)) O ONT ( ensure_appropriateness(organ,recipient) < do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) O CARREL ( ensure_appropriateness(organ,recipient) < do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) [ assign(organ,recipient)]done(ensure_appropriateness(organ,recipient) ) ABSTRACT LEVEL CONCRETE LEVEL PROCEDURE LEVEL LAWS ensure_appropriateness(o,r) assign(o,r) ensure_quality ensure_ compatibility
37. Context as source of interpretation O ONT ( appropriate(distribution)) O ONT ( ensure_appropriateness(organ,recipient) < do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) O CARREL ( ensure_quality(organ) < do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) O CARREL ( ensure_compatibility(organ,recipient) < do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) [ assign(organ,recipient)]done(ensure_quality(organ) ) [ assign(organ,recipient)]done(ensure_compatibility(organ,recipient) ) Spanish National Health System ABSTRACT LEVEL CONCRETE LEVEL PROCEDURE LEVEL LAWS ensure_appropriateness(o,r) assign(o,r) ensure_quality ensure_ compatibility
38. Current version of the idea OBLIGED( ONT, appropriate(distribution)) OBLIGED( ONT, ensure_appropriateness(organ,recipient) < do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) OBLIGED( ONT, ensure_quality(organ) BEFORE do(assign(organ,recipient)) ) Spanish National Health System ABSTRACT LEVEL CONCRETE LEVEL PROCEDURE LEVEL OBLIGED(utter (S7, W3, quality_ensured (organ)) IF (uttered( S7,W3, assign(organ,recipient)) ) uttered(S7,W3,assign(organ,recipient) ^ not uttered ( S7,W3, quality_ensured (organ)) AMELI implementation LAWS