Within Dialogue Modeling research in AI and NLP, considerable attention has been spent on ``dialogue state tracking'' (DST), which is the ability to update the representations of the speaker's needs at each turn in the dialogue by taking into account the past dialogue moves and history. Less studied but just as important to dialogue modeling, however, is ``common ground tracking'' (CGT), which identifies the shared belief space held by all of the participants in a task-oriented dialogue: the task-relevant propositions all participants accept as true. In this paper we present a method for automatically identifying the current set of shared beliefs and ``questions under discussion'' (QUDs) of a group with a shared goal. We annotate a dataset of multimodal interactions in a shared physical space with speech transcriptions, prosodic features, gestures, actions, and facets of collaboration, and operationalize these features for use in a deep neural model to predict moves toward construction of common ground. Model outputs cascade into a set of formal closure rules derived from situated evidence and belief axioms and update operations. We empirically assess the contribution of each feature type toward successful construction of common ground relative to ground truth, establishing a benchmark in this novel, challenging task.

In this paper, we consider the problem of social learning, where a group of agents embedded in a social network are interested in learning an underlying state of the world. Agents have incomplete, noisy, and heterogeneous sources of information, providing them with recurring private observations of the underlying state of the world. Agents can share their learning experience with their peers by taking actions observable to them, with values from a finite feasible set of states. Actions can be interpreted as samples from the beliefs which agents may form and update on what the true state of the world is. Sharing samples, in place of full beliefs, is motivated by the limited communication, cognitive, and information-processing resources available to agents especially in large populations. Previous work (Salhab et al.) poses the question as to whether learning with probability one is still achievable if agents are only allowed to communicate samples from their beliefs. We provide a definite positive answer to this question, assuming a strongly connected network and a ``collective distinguishability'' assumption, which are both required for learning even in full-belief-sharing settings. In our proposed belief update mechanism, each agent's belief is a normalized weighted geometric interpolation between a fully Bayesian private belief -- aggregating information from the private source -- and an ensemble of empirical distributions of the samples shared by her neighbors over time. By carefully constructing asymptotic almost-sure lower/upper bounds on the frequency of shared samples matching the true state/or not, we rigorously prove the convergence of all the beliefs to the true state, with probability one.

Multi-agent, collaborative sensor fusion is a vital component of a multi-national intelligence toolkit. In safety-critical and/or contested environments, adversaries may infiltrate and compromise a number of agents. We analyze state of the art multi-target tracking algorithms under this compromised agent threat model. We prove that the track existence probability test ("track score") is significantly vulnerable to even small numbers of adversaries. To add security awareness, we design a trust estimation framework using hierarchical Bayesian updating. Our framework builds beliefs of trust on tracks and agents by mapping sensor measurements to trust pseudomeasurements (PSMs) and incorporating prior trust beliefs in a Bayesian context. In case studies, our trust estimation algorithm accurately estimates the trustworthiness of tracks/agents, subject to observability limitations.

The integration and deployment of large language model (LLM)-based intelligent agents have been fraught with challenges that compromise their efficiency and efficacy. Among these issues are sub-optimal scheduling and resource allocation of agent requests over the LLM, the difficulties in maintaining context during interactions between agent and LLM, and the complexities inherent in integrating heterogeneous agents with different capabilities and specializations. The rapid increase of agent quantity and complexity further exacerbates these issues, often leading to bottlenecks and sub-optimal utilization of resources. Inspired by these challenges, this paper presents AIOS, an LLM agent operating system, which embeds large language model into operating systems (OS) as the brain of the OS, enabling an operating system "with soul" -- an important step towards AGI. Specifically, AIOS is designed to optimize resource allocation, facilitate context switch across agents, enable concurrent execution of agents, provide tool service for agents, and maintain access control for agents. We present the architecture of such an operating system, outline the core challenges it aims to resolve, and provide the basic design and implementation of the AIOS. Our experiments on concurrent execution of multiple agents demonstrate the reliability and efficiency of our AIOS modules. Through this, we aim to not only improve the performance and efficiency of LLM agents but also to pioneer for better development and deployment of the AIOS ecosystem in the future. The project is open-source at https://github.com/agiresearch/AIOS.

In this paper, we discuss the development and deployment of a robust autonomous system capable of performing various tasks in the maritime domain under unknown dynamic conditions. We investigate a data-driven approach based on modular design for ease of transfer of autonomy across different maritime surface vessel platforms. The data-driven approach alleviates issues related to a priori identification of system models that may become deficient under evolving system behaviors or shifting, unanticipated, environmental influences. Our proposed learning-based platform comprises a deep Koopman system model and a change point detector that provides guidance on domain shifts prompting relearning under severe exogenous and endogenous perturbations. Motion control of the autonomous system is achieved via an optimal controller design. The Koopman linearized model naturally lends itself to a linear-quadratic regulator (LQR) control design. We propose the C3D control architecture Cascade Control with Change Point Detection and Deep Koopman Learning. The framework is verified in station keeping task on an ASV in both simulation and real experiments. The approach achieved at least 13.9 percent improvement in mean distance error in all test cases compared to the methods that do not consider system changes.

Software agents, both human and computational, do not exist in isolation and often need to collaborate or coordinate with others to achieve their goals. In human society, social mechanisms such as norms ensure efficient functioning, and these techniques have been adopted by researchers in multi-agent systems (MAS) to create socially aware agents. However, traditional techniques have limitations, such as operating in limited environments often using brittle symbolic reasoning. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers a promising solution, providing a rich and expressive vocabulary for norms and enabling norm-capable agents that can perform a range of tasks such as norm discovery, normative reasoning and decision-making. This paper examines the potential of LLM-based agents to acquire normative capabilities, drawing on recent Natural Language Processing (NLP) and LLM research. We present our vision for creating normative LLM agents. In particular, we discuss how the recently proposed "LLM agent" approaches can be extended to implement such normative LLM agents. We also highlight challenges in this emerging field. This paper thus aims to foster collaboration between MAS, NLP and LLM researchers in order to advance the field of normative agents.

Norms are an important component of the social fabric of society by prescribing expected behaviour. In Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), agents interacting within a society are equipped to possess social capabilities such as reasoning about norms and trust. Norms have long been of interest within the Normative Multi-Agent Systems community with researchers studying topics such as norm emergence, norm violation detection and sanctioning. However, these studies have some limitations: they are often limited to simple domains, norms have been represented using a variety of representations with no standard approach emerging, and the symbolic reasoning mechanisms generally used may suffer from a lack of extensibility and robustness. In contrast, Large Language Models (LLMs) offer opportunities to discover and reason about norms across a large range of social situations. This paper evaluates the capability of LLMs to detecting norm violations. Based on simulated data from 80 stories in a household context, with varying complexities, we investigated whether 10 norms are violated. For our evaluations we first obtained the ground truth from three human evaluators for each story. Then, the majority result was compared against the results from three well-known LLM models (Llama 2 7B, Mixtral 7B and ChatGPT-4). Our results show the promise of ChatGPT-4 for detecting norm violations, with Mixtral some distance behind. Also, we identify areas where these models perform poorly and discuss implications for future work.

Agents act to bring about a state of the world that is more compatible with their personal or institutional values. To formalise this intuition, the paper proposes an action framework based on the STRIPS formalisation. Technically, the contribution expresses actions in terms of Value-based Formal Reasoning (VFR), which provides a set of propositions derived from an Agent's value profile and the Agent's assessment of propositions with respect to the profile. Conceptually, the contribution provides a computational framework for a form of consequentialist ethics which is satisficing, pluralistic, act-based, and preferential.

Classical planning formulations like the Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) admit action sequences guaranteed to achieve a goal state given an initial state if any are possible. However, reasoning problems defined in PDDL do not capture temporal aspects of action taking, for example that two agents in the domain can execute an action simultaneously if postconditions of each do not interfere with preconditions of the other. A human expert can decompose a goal into largely independent constituent parts and assign each agent to one of these subgoals to take advantage of simultaneous actions for faster execution of plan steps, each using only single agent planning. By contrast, large language models (LLMs) used for directly inferring plan steps do not guarantee execution success, but do leverage commonsense reasoning to assemble action sequences. We combine the strengths of classical planning and LLMs by approximating human intuitions for two-agent planning goal decomposition. We demonstrate that LLM-based goal decomposition leads to faster planning times than solving multi-agent PDDL problems directly while simultaneously achieving fewer plan execution steps than a single agent plan alone and preserving execution success. Additionally, we find that LLM-based approximations of subgoals can achieve similar multi-agent execution steps than those specified by human experts. Website and resources at https://glamor-usc.github.io/twostep

Autonomous systems are soon to be ubiquitous, from manufacturing autonomy to agricultural field robots, and from health care assistants to the entertainment industry. The majority of these systems are developed with modular sub-components for decision-making, planning, and control that may be hand-engineered or learning-based. While these existing approaches have been shown to perform well under the situations they were specifically designed for, they can perform especially poorly in rare, out-of-distribution scenarios that will undoubtedly arise at test-time. The rise of foundation models trained on multiple tasks with impressively large datasets from a variety of fields has led researchers to believe that these models may provide common sense reasoning that existing planners are missing. Researchers posit that this common sense reasoning will bridge the gap between algorithm development and deployment to out-of-distribution tasks, like how humans adapt to unexpected scenarios. Large language models have already penetrated the robotics and autonomous systems domains as researchers are scrambling to showcase their potential use cases in deployment. While this application direction is very promising empirically, foundation models are known to hallucinate and generate decisions that may sound reasonable, but are in fact poor. We argue there is a need to step back and simultaneously design systems that can quantify the certainty of a model's decision, and detect when it may be hallucinating. In this work, we discuss the current use cases of foundation models for decision-making tasks, provide a general definition for hallucinations with examples, discuss existing approaches to hallucination detection and mitigation with a focus on decision problems, and explore areas for further research in this exciting field.