Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 11

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2017F226

Citation: Proceedings of the 2017 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 11, pages 293–297 (2017)

Full text

Abstract. Adaptive autonomous (AA) agents are able to make their own decisions on when and with whom to share their autonomy based on their states. Whereas dependability gives evidence on whether a system, (e.g. an agent team), and its provided services are to be trusted. In this paper, an initial analysis on AA agents with respect to dependability is conducted. Firstly, AA is modeled through a pairwise relationship called willingness of agents to interact, i.e. to ask for and give assistance. Secondly, dependability is evaluated by considering solely the reliability attribute, which presents the continuity of correct services. The failure analysis is realized by modeling the agents through Petri Nets. Simulation results indicate that agents drop slightly more tasks when they are more willing to interact than otherwise, especially when the fail-rate of individual agents increases. Conclusively, the willingness should be tweaked such that there is compromise between performance and helpfulness.

References

1. A. Avižienis, J. Laprie, B. Randell, and C. Landwehr, “Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing,” IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 11–33, 2004. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TDSC.2004.2
2. S. Bernardi, J. Merseguer, and D. C. Petriu, Model-Driven Dependability Assessment of Software Systems. SPRINGER, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39512-3
3. M. Johnson, J. M. Bradshaw, P. J. Feltovich, C. M. Jonker, B. Van Riemsdijk, and M. Sierhuis, “The fundamental principle of coactive design: Interdependence must shape autonomy,” in Coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems VI. Springer, 2011, pp. 172–191. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21268-0_10
4. C. Castelfranchi, “Founding agent’s ’autonomy’ on dependence theory,” in Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. IOS Press, 2000, pp. 353–357.
5. B. Hardin and M. A. Goodrich, “On using mixed-initiative control: A perspective for managing large-scale robotic teams,” in Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction, 2009, pp. 165–172. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1514095.1514126
6. M. Frasheri, B. Çürüklü, and M. Ekström, “Towards collaborative adaptive autonomous agents,” in 9th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence 2017 ICAART, 24 Feb 2017, Porto, Portugal, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5220/0006195500780087
7. S. Sharman, N. Sukavanam, N. Kumar, and A. Kumar, “Reliability analysis of complex robotic system using petri nets and fuzzy lambda-tau methodology,” International Journal for Computer-Aided Engineering and Software, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 354–364, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1108/02644401011029925
8. W. Sheng, Q. Yang, and N. Xi, “Modeling, analysis and design for multi-robot exploration based on petri nets,” 2004.
9. R. Ammour, E. Leclercq, E. Sanlaville, and D. Lefebvre, “Faults prognosis using partially observed stochastic petri nets,” in International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems. IEEE, 2016, pp. 472–477. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/WODES.2016.7497890
10. S. Chen, D. W. Ho, L. Li, and M. Liu, “Fault-tolerant consensus of multi-agent system with distributed adaptive protocol,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 2142–2155, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2014.2366204
11. S. D. Stoller and F. B. Schneider, “Automated analysis of fault-tolerance in distributed systems,” Formal Methods in System Design, Springer Science, vol. 26, pp. 183–196, 2005. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10703-005-1492-2
12. D. Boukredera, R. Maamri, and S. Aknine, “Modeling and analysis of reliable contract net protocol using timed colored petri nets,” in International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology. IEEE, 2013, pp. 17–24. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/WI-IAT.2013.85
13. M. Perše, M. Kristan, J. Perš, G. Mušič, and S. K. G. Vučkovič, “Analysis of multi-agent activity using petri nets,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 43, pp. 1491–1501, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2009.11.011
14. A. D. Torshizi and S. R. Hejazi, “A fuzzy approach to sequential failure analysis using petri nets,” International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Production Research, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 53–60, 2010.
15. T. Fong, C. Thorpe, and C. Baur, Collaborative control: A robot-centric model for vehicle teleoperation. Carnegie Mellon University, The Robotics Institute, 2001, vol. 1.
16. J. Brookshire, S. Singh, and R. Simmons, “Preliminary results in sliding autonomy for assembly by coordinated teams,” in Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2004.(IROS 2004). Proceedings. 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on, vol. 1, 2004, pp. 706–711. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2004.1389435
17. R. Parasuraman, T. B. Sheridan, and C. D. Wickens, “A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation,” IEEE Transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 286–297, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/3468.844354
18. M. Johnson, J. M. Bradshaw, P. J. Feltovich, C. M. Jonker, M. B. Van Riemsdijk, and M. Sierhuis, “Coactive design: Designing support for interdependence in joint activity,” Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 43–69, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.3.1.Johnson
19. S. K. Barber, A. Goel, and C. E. Martin, “Dynamic adaptive autonomy in multi-agent systems,” Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 129–147, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218001401001015
20. M. J. Barnes, J. Y. Chen, and F. Jentsch, “Designing for mixed-initiative interactions between human and autonomous systems in complex environments,” in Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), 2015 IEEE International Conference on, 2015, pp. 1386–1390. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2015.246
21. N. Schurr, J. Marecki, and M. Tambe, “Riaact: A robust approach to adjustable autonomy for human-multiagent teams,” in Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems-Volume 3, 2008, pp. 1429–1432.
22. M. Tambe, “Agent architectures for flexible, practical teamwork,” in Proc. of the 14th National Conf. on AI, USA: AAAI press, 1997, pp. 22–28.
23. J. M. Bradshaw, H. Jung, S. Kulkarni, M. Johnson, P. Feltovich, J. Allen, L. Bunch, N. Chambers, L. Galescu, R. Jeffers et al., “Kaa: policy-based explorations of a richer model for adjustable autonomy,” in Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, 2005, pp. 214–221. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1082473.1082506
24. A. Uszok, J. Bradshaw, R. Jeffers, N. Suri, P. Hayes, M. Breedy, L. Bunch, M. Johnson, S. Kulkarni, and J. Lott, “Kaos policy and domain services: Toward a description-logic approach to policy representation, deconfliction, and enforcement,” in Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks, 2003. Proceedings. POLICY 2003. IEEE 4th International Workshop on, 2003, pp. 93–96. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/POLICY.2003.1206963
25. K. Jensen, Coloured Petri Nets: Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use. Springer Verlag, 2003.