If computational social science is to find practical application in informing policy decisions and proportionately analyzing courses of action, then it will have to make progress in the area of composition of social models.  Since a single simulation cannot hold a world of information, policy makers need to switch in and out modules in federations of simulations to test policies against all possible social environments.  Voting processes as they occur in nature, both in the form of cognition in a human mind of disparate world views, and in the form of equilibria seeking coevolution of species, inform how to combine model results externally and deeply, respectively.  These algorithms, which use the same principles of soft computation found in nature, enable any models to mesh together, even if they have different ontologies, or their data conflict, regardless of the degree they overlap.  A whiteboard architecture in which models report in their own ontologies how other models may inform them and what they have to offer other models, is a framework for the arbitrary meshing of social models.

It has been demonstrated that people have a tendency to adapt both their linguistic representations and physical Communication is often required between agents as they actions in response to those they are interacting with, i.e., attempt to solve collaborative multi-agent tasks. This is they tend to formulate behavior and speech that will be particularly true in conditions in which an agent is working salient and sensible to a collaborating partner (Whittaker alongside a human--clearly, conventional electronic 2003). Collaboration in humans occurs via a process in communication is not feasible in this scenario; rather, these which people align their linguistic representations of the agents, including humans, must take advantage of physical environment allowing for more effective communicative communication in the shared context to confer necessary behavior. This alignment is achieved via a process in information. As an agent observes the actions of the others, which local alignment of environmental representations, it must modify its own behavior accordingly.

Just as special purpose computers and mainframes grew into the generalpurpose personal computers we use everyday, special purpose industrialrobots are evolving into more general purpose personal robots. Asrobots become more capable and universal, their applications are lesswell-defined or even unknown at design time. We will have to designrobots for classes of tasks rather than specific applications. Havingguidelines for how to best organize, interface, and implement robotsystems and reason about trade-offs, as we do in computerarchitecture, will become crucial for success. In this paper weintroduce and adapt some useful notions and principles from computerarchitecture to robot systems architecture. We argue that notions suchas locality of reference, balanced architectures, and boundedness (interms of IO, memory, and CPU) can be leveraged in robot systemsdesign, and in particular, in the design of distributed robot systems.

Formations are often seen in nature, and bring many benefits for the group as a whole. They can allow a group to explore a large area more effectively, can ease movement of the group through the environment, and can increase group perceptual coverage and increase defensive capabilities, for example. The benefits of any particular formation vary and are obtained from the structure the formation provides. Robotic formations can have similar applications. To date, the techniques used and formations employed in robotic applications are significantly simpler than those seen in nature. Current techniques often require some level of global knowledge, central processing or other unrealistic assumptions. We seek to develop a formation control technique that has as few of these limitations as possible. Each agent under our approach has only local knowledge of the environment, uses no broadcast communication, and can communicate only over a limited range. Formations are achieved by organizing agents into a graph structure, where agents occupying the vertices take on the role of maintaining an appropriate number of agents on each edge, thus preserving the formation's shape and scale. We do not assume a known or static population: the evolving formation acts as a physical data structure to assist in placing and rearranging agents as the population changes. This approach does not require a global coordinate system, fixed positions within the formation, or any single lead agent. All agents within our approach are peers, and any can adopt any role within the formation.

The paper addresses how a robot can maintain a state representation of all that it knows about the environment over time and space, given its observations and its domain knowledge. The advantage in combining domain knowledge and observations is that the robot can in this way project from the past into the future, and reason from observations to more general statements to help guide how it plans to act and interact. The difficulty lies in the fact that observations are typically uncertain and logical inference for completion against a knowledge base is computationally hard.

We introduce the logic of positive and negative contingency. Together with modal operators of necessity and impossibility they allow to dispense of negation. We study classes of Kripke models where the number of points is restricted, and show that the modalities reduce in the corresponding logics.

Cooperation in multiagent systems essentially hinges on appropriate communication. This paper shows how to model communication in teamwork within TeamLog, the first multi-modal framework wholly capturing a methodology for working together. Taking off from the dialogue theory of Walton and Krabbe, the paper focuses on deliberation, the main type of dialogue during team planning. We provide a four-stage schema of deliberation dialogue along with semantics of adequate speech acts, filling the gap in logical modeling of communication during planning.

Preference-based reasoning is a form of commonsense reasoning that makes many problems easier to express and sometimes more likely to have a solution. We present an approach to introduce preferences in the weight constraint construct, which is a very useful programming construct widely adopted in Answer Set Programming (ASP). We show the usefulness of the proposed extension, and we outline how to accordingly extend the ASP semantics.

The Jobs Puzzle, introduced in a book about automated reasoning, is a logic puzzle solvable by some "intelligent sixth graders," but the formalization of the puzzle by the authors was, according to them, "sometimes difficult and sometimes tedious." The puzzle thus presents a triple challenge: 1) formalize it in a non-difficult, non-tedious way; 2) formalize it in a way that adheres closely to the English statement of the puzzle; 3) have an automated general-purpose commonsense reasoner that can accept that formalization and solve the puzzle quickly. In this paper, I present and discuss three formalizations that are less difficult and less tedious than the original. However, none satisfy all three requirements as well as might be desired, and there are a significant number of automated reasoners that cannot solve the puzzle using any of the formalizations. So the Jobs Puzzle remains an interesting challenge.

Research in open-domain commonsense reasoning has been hindered by the lack of evaluation metrics for judging progress and comparing alternative approaches. Taking inspiration from large-scale question sets used in natural language processing research, we authored one thousand English-language questions that directly assess commonsense causal reasoning, called the Choice Of Plausible Alternatives (COPA) evaluation. Using a forced-choice format, each question gives a premise and two plausible causes or effects, where the correct choice is the alternative that is more plausible than the other. This paper describes the authoring methodology that we used to develop a validated question set with sufficient breadth to advance open-domain commonsense reasoning research. We discuss the design decisions made during the authoring process, and explain how these decisions will affect the design of high-scoring systems. We also present the performance of multiple baseline approaches that use statistical natural language processing techniques, establishing initial benchmarks for future systems.