[Modeling] Modeling an Agent Class- register your opinion

James Odell email@jamesodell.com
Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:24:02 -0400

Hi Joaquin,

I agree: implementing roles with most OO languages is not very straight
forward.  This has been a problem with most programming languages for the
last 50 years.  Notice that I said "most."  There are some that do support
dynamic and multiple classification -- and they are [shudder] object
oriented (e.g., KEE, Kappa, CLOS).  The point I think you are making, then,
A) agents need an approach that supports dynamic and multiple
classification, and
B) when we implement agents, we need to make sure that their development
platforms support dynamic and multiple classification.

Some people use variations of the State or Adapter patterns to accomplish
this -- which is basically like creating the "proxy" as you describe.
Did I understand you correctly?


On 6/20/03 3:38 AM, "Joaquin Peña" indited:

> In our view, a role does not mean isolated. It only takes meaning
> involved in a role model.
> As Sehl, we see role as an abstract concept using at analysis
> stage to perform a behaviour--directed analysis and to naturally
> model organizational structures. That it is to say, Role Models
> are the representation of Goals, and tasks, are the services that
> an agent playing a role must provide to interact with others roles
> in the role model to achieve this goal.
> Thus, the description of a MAS can be seen in two levels: The Role
> Level is an abstract behaviour centered view (used in analysis),
> and the Class level where roles are implemented and mapped onto
> agents.
> Well, but ¿How Roles can be Implemented? Our view is an Aspect
> Oriented Approach where an agent is a set of pure functional
> passive components (that provides all the services its role
> requires) that can be only used via a set of proxy objects that
> represents the roles. Thus, interactions are implemented in a role
> class (proxy) completely separated from functionality. James, I
> think this fit with your definition of role ¿doesn't it?
> With our view, if an employee agent that lose it department means
> that it lose the proxy that represent this role, thus, hereafter
> this agent can not use the services it provides for employee.
> We think that roles don't have a direct mappig in the object
> Oriented paradigms.