Skip to main content

Refinement of Intentions

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10021))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

According to Bratman, future-directed intentions are high-level plans. We view such plans as high-level actions that can typically not be executed directly: they have to be progressively refined until executable basic actions are obtained. Higher- and lower-level actions are linked by the means-end relation, alias instrumentality relation. In this paper we extend Shoham’s database perspective of Bratman’s theory by the notions of refinement and instrumentality.

This work was partially supported by ANR-11-LABX-0040-CIMI within the program ANR-11-IDEX-0002-02 and CSC (Chinese Scholarship Council). A long version is available at www.irit.fr/~Andreas.Herzig/P/Jelia16db.html.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Audi, R.: A theory of practical reasoning. J. Am. Philos. Q. 19, 25–39 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baral, C., Gelfond, M.: Reasoning about intended actions. In: Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), vol. 20, pp. 689–694. AAAI Press, MIT Press, Menlo Park, Cambridge, London (1999) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bratman, M.: Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987). Reedited 1999 with CSLI Publications

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bratman, M.: Intention, belief, and instrumental rationality. Reasons for action, pp. 13–36 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bratman, M.E., Israel, D.J., Pollack, M.E.: Plans and resource-bounded practical reasoning. J. Comput. Intell. 4, 349–355 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Intention is choice with commitment. J. Artif. Intell. 42(2), 213–261 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. De Silva, L., Sardina, S., Padgham, L.: First principles planning in BDI systems. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), vol. 2, pp. 1105–1112 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dignum, F., Conte, R.: Intentional agents and goal formation. In: Singh, M.P., Rao, A., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) ATAL 1997. LNCS, vol. 1365, pp. 231–243. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). doi:10.1007/BFb0026762

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Erol, K., Hendler, J., Nau, D.S.: HTN planning: complexity and expressivity. In: Proceedings of the 12th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), vol. 94, pp. 1123–1128 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fox, M., Long, D.: Modelling mixed discrete-continuous domains for planning. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 27, 235–297 (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Grant, J., Kraus, S., Perlis, D., Wooldridge, M.: Postulates for revising BDI structures. Synthese 175(1), 39–62 (2010)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Herzig, A., Lorini, E., Perrussel, L., Xiao, Z.: BDI logics for BDI architectures: old problems, new perspectives. Knstliche Intelligenz (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Herzig, A., Perrussel, L., Xiao, Z.: On hierarchical task networks. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A.C. (eds.) JELIA 2016. LNCS(LNAI), vol. 10021, pp. xx–yy. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hunsberger, L., Ortiz, Jr., C.: Dynamic intention structures I: a theory of intention representation. In: Proceedings of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 298–326 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Icard, T., Pacuit, E., Shoham, Y.: Joint revision of belief and intention. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR), pp. 572–574 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lorini, E., Herzig, A.: A logic of intention and attempt. Synthese 163(1), 45–77 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Sardina, S., de Silva, L., Padgham, L.: Hierarchical planning in BDI agent programming languages: a formal approach. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 1001–1008. ACM (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shoham, Y.: Logical theories of intention and the database perspective. J. Philos. Logic 38(6), 633–647 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Zee, M., Doder, D., Dastani, M., Van Der Torre, L.: AGM revision of beliefs about action and time. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 3250–3256 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhanhao Xiao .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Herzig, A., Perrussel, L., Xiao, Z., Zhang, D. (2016). Refinement of Intentions. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_39

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_39

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48757-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48758-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics