Abstract
A cognitive agent is an agent characterized by properties that are generally attributed to humans. Cognition is viewed here as a general mechanism of reasoning (in contrast with reactive agents) about knowledge. Such agents can perceive their environment, reason about fact or epistemic states of other agents, have a decision making process, etc. This article presents the main concepts used in cognitive agents formalizations, and speak about two particular concepts related to humans: trust and emotion. The language used for cognitive agents is here a logical language because it particularly fits well for both knowledge representation and reasoning formalization. But, even if trust and emotion can be both easily formalized by logical languages, we show that some numerical models are also well adapted.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Note that the word agent comes from Latin language agere and means to act, to do.
- 2.
These logics are often called BDI logics (for belief, desire, intention). By analogy, we speak also of BDI agents (systems).
- 3.
Their paper in Artificial Intelligence has received the AAMAS most influential paper award in 2008.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
That is, a concept constructed from lower-level concepts.
- 7.
In the present work, we only consider qualitative approaches to the notion of belief. We do not discuss the quantitative approaches formalizing degrees of belief (see e.g. (Laverny and Lang 2005)).
- 8.
Besides BDI logics, the operator \( After _{\alpha }\,\) is often denoted by \([\alpha ]\).
- 9.
One could think that this should be a sufficient but not necessary condition. Indeed, it suffices that Agent i believes Agent j will be capable of executing Action \(\alpha \) in time to achieve Goal \(\varphi \). Nevertheless, it is worth noting that we formalize a notion of trust “right here, right now”, not a notion of potential trust.
- 10.
Plato clearly establishes a distinction between reason, passion, and desire.
- 11.
It is a system based on the Tok architecture of the project Oz. See http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/oz/web/.
References
Adam C, Herzig A, Longin D (2009) A logical formalization of the OCC theory of emotions. Synthese 168(2):201–248. ftp://ftp.irit.fr/IRIT/LILAC/Journaux_internationaux/2009_Adam_et_al_Synthese.pdf
Adam C, Gaudou B, Longin D, Lorini E (2011) Logical modeling of emotions for ambient intelligence. In: Mastrogiacomo F, Chong NY (eds) Handbook of research on ambient intelligence and smart environments: trends and perspectives, IGI Global
Amgoud L, Rahwan I (2006) An argumentation-based approach for practical reasoning. In: Weiss G, Stone P (eds) Proceedings of the international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2006), ACM, pp 347–354
Austin JL (1962) How to do things with words. Oxford University, Oxford
Baltag A, Moss LS (2004) Logics for epistemic programs. Synthese 139(2):165–224
Belnap N, Perloff M, Xu M (2001) Facing the future: agents and choices in our indeterminist world. Oxford University, New York
van Benthem J, Liu F (2007) Dynamic logic of preference upgrade. J Appl Non-Class Log 17(2):157–182
Berreby F, Bourgne G J-G G (2015) Modelling moral reasoning and ethical responsibility with logical programming. In: Logic for programming, artificial intelligence, and reasoning, LNCS, vol 9450, Springer, Berlin, pp 532–548
Bonatti PA, Oliveira EC, Sabater-Mir J, Sierra C, Toni F (2014) On the integration of trust with negotiation, argumentation and semantics. Knowl Eng Rev 29(1):31–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269888913000064
Bonnefon JF, Longin D, Nguyen MH (2009) A logical framework for trust-related emotions. Electron Commun EASST, Form Methods Interact Syst 22:1–16
Bratman M (1987) Intentions, plans, and practical reason. Harvard University, Cambridge
Burgess JP (2002) Basic tense logic. In: Gabbay D, Guenthner F (eds) Handbook of philosophical logic, vol 7, 2nd edn. Kluwer, pp 1–42
Castaneda HN (1975) Thinking and Doing. D. Reidel, Dordrecht
Castelfranchi C, Paglieri F (2007) The role of beliefs in goal dynamics: Prolegomena to a constructive theory of intentions. Synthese 155:237–263
Castelfranchi C, Tan YH (eds) (2001) Trust and deception in virtual societies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Chellas BF (1980) Modal logic: an introduction. Cambridge
Cohen PR, Levesque HJ (1990) Intention is choice with commitment. Artif Intell J 42(2–3):213–261
Cohen PR, Morgan J, Pollack ME (eds) (1990) Intentions in communication. MIT, Cambridge
Conte R, Castelfranchi C (1995) Cognitive and social action. London University College of London, London
van Ditmarsch H, van der Hoek W, Kooi B (2007) Dynamic epistemic logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers
Ditmarsch Hv, der Hoek Wv, Kooi B (2007) Dynamic epistemic logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers
Dubois D, Lorini E, Prade H (2017) The strength of desires: a logical approach. Minds Mach 27(1):199–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-017-9426-5
El-Nasr MS, Yen J, Ioerger TR (2000) FLAME: fuzzy logic adaptive model of emotions. Auton Agents Multi-Agent Syst 3(3):219–257
Gabbay D, Horty J, Parent X, van der Meyden R, van der Torre L (eds) (2013) Handbook of deontic logic and normative systems. College Publication. http://www.collegepublications.co.uk/downloads/handbooks00001.pdf
Gilbert M (1989) On social facts. Routledge, London
Gochet P, Gribomont P (2006) Epistemic logic. In: Gabbay D, Woods J (eds) Handbook of the history of logic, vol 7. Elsevier, pp 99–195
Gordon R (1987) The structure of emotions. Cambridge University, New York
Gratch J, Marsella S (2005) Lessons from emotion psychology for the design of lifelike characters. J Appl Artif Intell (special issue on Educational Agents - Beyond Virtual Tutors) 19(3–4):215–233
Harel D, Kozen D, Tiuryn J (2000) Dynamic logic. MIT, Cambridge
Herzig A, Lorini E, HÃbner JF, Vercouter L, (2010) A logic of trust and reputation Logic. J IGPL 18(1):214–244
van der Hoek W, Jamroga W, Wooldridge M (2007) Towards a theory of intention revision. Synthese 155(2):265–290
Kamvar SD, Schlosser MT, Garcia-Molina H (2003) The eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In: 12th international conference on World Wide Web (WWW), ACM, pp 640–651
Kooi B (2007) Expressivity and completeness for public update logic via reduction axioms. J Appl Non-Class Log 17(2):231–253
Koster A, Schorlemmer WM, Sabater-Mir J (2013) Opening the black box of trust: reasoning about trust models in a BDI agent. J Log Comput 23(1):25–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exs003
Lane R, Nadel L (eds) (2000) The cognitive neuroscience of emotions., Oxford
Langville AN, Meyer CD (2005) Deeper inside pagerank. Internet Math 1(3):335–400
Laverny N, Lang J (2005) From knowledge-based programs to graded belief-based programs, part ii: off-line reasoning. In: Proceedings of IJCAI’05, Professional book center, pp 497–502
Lazarus RS (1991) Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University, Oxford
van Linder B, van der Hoek WJJC, Meyer, (1998) Formalising abilities and opportunities. Fundamenta Informaticae 34:53–101
Loewenstein G (2000) Emotions in economic theory and economic behavior. Am Econ Rev 90(2):426–432
Lorini E (2011) The cognitive anatomy and functions of expectations revisited. In: Paglieri F, Tummolini L, Falcone R, Miceli M (eds) The goals of cognition: festschfit for cristiano castelfranchi, College Publications, London, to appear
Lorini E (2016) A logic for reasoning about moral agents. Log Anal 58(230):177–218
Lorini E, Schwarzentruber F (2011) A logic for reasoning about counterfactual emotions. Artif Intell 175:814–847
Lorini E, Longin D, Gaudou B, Herzig A (2009) The logic of acceptance: grounding institutions on agents’ attitudes. J Log Comput 19(6):901–940. ftp://ftp.irit.fr/IRIT/LILAC/JLC.pdf
Marsh S (1994) Formalising trust as a computational concept. Ph.D. thesis, Department of computing sciece and. mathematics, University of Sterling
Ortony A, Clore G, Collins A (1988) The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University, Cambridge
Osman N, Gutierrez P, Sierra C (2015) Trustworthy advice. Knowl-Based Syst 82:41–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.02.024
Page L, Brin S, Motwani R, Winograd T (1998) The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web. Technical report, Stanford Digital Library Technologies Project
Pelachaud C (2009) Modelling multimodal expression of emotion in a virtual agent. Philos Trans R Soc B 364:3539–3548
Pinyol I, Sabater-Mir J (2013) Computational trust and reputation models for open multi-agent systems: a review. Artif Intell Rev 40(1):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-011-9277-z
Rao AS, Georgeff MP (1991) Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, pp 473–484
de Rosis F, Pelachaud C, Poggi I, Carofiglio V, De Carolis B (2003) From greta’s mind to her face: modelling the dynamics of affective states in a conversational embodied agent. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 59:81–118
Sabater J, Sierra C (2005) Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artif Intell 24:33–60
Searle JR (1969) Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge
Searle JR (1983) Intentionality: an essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge
Segerberg K (1992) Getting started: Beginnings in the logic of action. Studia Logica 51(3–4):347–378
Segerberg K (1995) Belief revision from the point of view of doxastic logic. Log J IGPL 3(4):535–553
Singh MP (1999) An ontology for commitments in multiagent systems. Artif Intell Law 7:97–113
Steunebrink BR, Dastani M, Meyer JJC (2008) A formal model of emotions: integrating qualitative and quantitative aspects. In: Proceedings of the 18th European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI 2008), IOS, pp 256–260
Turrini P, Meyer JJC, Castelfranchi C (2010) Coping with shame and sense of guilt: a dynamic logic account. J AAMAS 20(3)
van Benthem J (1991) The logic of time. D. Reidel Publishing Company
Wooldridge M (2000) Reasoning about rational agents. MIT, USA
Zeelenberg M, van Dijk WW, Manstead ASR (1998) Reconsidering the relation between regret and responsibility. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 74:254–272
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ben-Naim, J., Longin, D., Lorini, E. (2020). Formalization of Cognitive-Agent Systems, Trust, and Emotions. In: Marquis, P., Papini, O., Prade, H. (eds) A Guided Tour of Artificial Intelligence Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06164-7_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06164-7_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-06163-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-06164-7
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)