In a complex, dynamic multiagent setting, coherent team actions are often jeopardized by conflicts in agents' beliefs, plans, and actions. Despite the considerable progress in teamwork research, the challenge of intrateam conflict resolution has remained largely unaddressed. This article presents CONSA, a system we are developing to resolve conflicts using argumentation-based negotiations. CONSA focuses on exploiting the benefits of argumentation in a team setting. Thus, CONSA casts conflict resolution as a team problem, so that the recent advances in teamwork can be brought to bear during conflict resolution to improve argumentation flexibility. Furthermore, because teamwork conflicts sometimes involve past teamwork, teamwork models can be exploited to provide agents with reusable argumentation knowledge. Additionally, CONSA also includes argumentation strategies geared toward benefiting the team, rather than the individual, and techniques to reduce argumentation overhead.

This article reports on the first phase of the continuous planning and execution framework (CPEF), a system that employs sophisticated plan-generation, -execution, -monitoring, and -repair capabilities to solve complex tasks in unpredictable and dynamic environments. CPEF embraces the philosophy that plans are dynamic, open-ended artifacts that must evolve in response to an ever-changing environment. In particular, plans and activities are updated in response to new information and requirements to ensure that they remain viable and relevant. Users are an integral part of the process, providing input that influences plan generation, repair, and overall system control. CPEF has been applied successfully to generate, execute, and repair complex plans for gaining and maintaining air superiority within a simulated operating environment.

Some application domains highlight the importance of distributed continual planning concepts; coordinating teams of unmanned ground vehicles in dynamic environments is an example of such a domain. In this article, I illustrate the ideas in, and promises of, distributed continual planning by showing how acquiring and distributing operator intent among multiple semiautonomous vehicles supports ongoing, cooperative mission elaboration and revision.

For many years, research in AI plan generation was governed by a number of strong, simplifying assumptions: The planning agent is omniscient, its actions are deterministic and instantaneous, its goals are fixed and categorical, and its environment is static. More recently, researchers have developed expanded planning algorithms that are not predicated on such assumptions, but changing the way in which plans are formed is only part of what is required when the classical assumptions are abandoned. The demands of dynamic, uncertain environments mean that in addition to being able to form plans -- even probabilistic, uncertain plans -- agents must be able to effectively manage their plans. In this article, which is based on a talk given at the 1998 AAAI Fall Symposium on Distributed, Continual Planning, we first identify reasoning tasks that are involved in plan management, including commitment management, environment monitoring, alternative assessment, plan elaboration, metalevel control, and coordination with other agents. We next survey approaches we have developed to many of these tasks and discuss a plan-management system we are building to ground our theoretical work, by providing us with a platform for integrating our techniques and exploring their value in a realistic problem. Throughout, our discussion is informal and relies on numerous examples; the reader can consult the various papers cited for technical details.

Calendar of upcoming AI meetings, conferences, and other events.

Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) promise to offer solutions to problems where established, older paradigms fall short. In order to validate such claims that are repeatedly made in software agent publications, empirical in-depth studies of advantages and weaknesses of multi-agent solutions versus conventional ones in practical applications are needed. Climate control in large buildings is one application area where multi-agent systems, and market-oriented programming in particular, have been reported to be very successful, although central control solutions are still the standard practice. We have therefore constructed and implemented a variety of market designs for this problem, as well as different standard control engineering solutions. This article gives a detailed analysis and comparison, so as to learn about differences between standard versus agent approaches, and yielding new insights about benefits and limitations of computational markets. An important outcome is that ``local information plus market communication produces global control''.

The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) held its 1998 Fall Symposium Series on 23 to 25 October at the Omni Rosen Hotel in Orlando, Florida. This article contains summaries of seven of the symposia that were conducted: (1) Cognitive Robotics; (2) Distributed, Continual Planning; (3) Emotional and Intelligent: The Tangled Knot of Cognition; (4) Integrated Planning for Autonomous Agent Architectures; (5) Planning with Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes; (6) Reasoning with Visual and Diagrammatic Representations; and (7) Robotics and Biology: Developing Connections.

The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) held its 1998 Fall Symposium Series on 23 to 25 October at the Omni Rosen Hotel in Orlando, Florida. This article contains summaries of seven of the symposia that were conducted: (1) Cognitive Robotics; (2) Distributed, Continual Planning; (3) Emotional and Intelligent: The Tangled Knot of Cognition; (4) Integrated Planning for Autonomous Agent Architectures; (5) Planning with Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes; (6) Reasoning with Visual and Diagrammatic Representations; and (7) Robotics and Biology: Developing Connections.

Calendar of upcoming AI meetings, conferences, and other events.

Students interested in attending the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Austin, July 30-August 3, 2000, should consult the AAAI web site for further information about the Student Abstract program and the Doctoral Consortium. Details about these programs have also been mailed to all AAAI members. The Scholarship Program provides partial travel support and a complimentary technical program registration for students who (1) are full-time undergraduate or graduate students at colleges and universities; (2) are members of AAAI; (3) submit papers to the technical program or letters of recommendation from their faculty adviser; and (4) submit scholarship applications to AAAI by April 15, 2000. In addition, repeat scholarship applicants must have fulfilled the volunteer and reporting requirements for previous awards. In the event that scholarship applications AAAI President David Waltz presented The 1999 AAAI Classic Paper Award to exceed available funds, preference John McDermott for R1: An Expert in the Computer Systems Domain.