The AAAI-99 Workshop Program (a part of the sixteenth national conference on artificial intelligence) was held in Orlando, Florida. The program included 16 workshops covering a wide range of topics in AI. Each workshop was limited to approximately 25 to 50 participants. Participation was by invitation from the workshop organizers. The workshops were Agent-Based Systems in the Business Context, Agents' Conflicts, Artificial Intelligence for Distributed Information Networking, Artificial Intelligence for Electronic Commerce, Computation with Neural Systems Workshop, Configuration, Data Mining with Evolutionary Algorithms: Research Directions (Jointly sponsored by GECCO-99), Environmental Decision Support Systems and Artificial Intelligence, Exploring Synergies of Knowledge Management and Case-Based Reasoning, Intelligent Information Systems, Intelligent Software Engineering, Machine Learning for Information Extraction, Mixed-Initiative Intelligence, Negotiation: Settling Conflicts and Identifying Opportunities, Ontology Management, and Reasoning in Context for AI Applications.

Agents in dynamic multi-agent environments must monitor their peers to execute individual and group plans. A key open question is how much monitoring of other agents' states is required to be effective: The Monitoring Selectivity Problem. We investigate this question in the context of detecting failures in teams of cooperating agents, via Socially-Attentive Monitoring, which focuses on monitoring for failures in the social relationships between the agents. We empirically and analytically explore a family of socially-attentive teamwork monitoring algorithms in two dynamic, complex, multi-agent domains, under varying conditions of task distribution and uncertainty. We show that a centralized scheme using a complex algorithm trades correctness for completeness and requires monitoring all teammates. In contrast, a simple distributed teamwork monitoring algorithm results in correct and complete detection of teamwork failures, despite relying on limited, uncertain knowledge, and monitoring only key agents in a team. In addition, we report on the design of a socially-attentive monitoring system and demonstrate its generality in monitoring several coordination relationships, diagnosing detected failures, and both on-line and off-line applications.

In this article, I describe several challenges facing the integration of two distinct lines of AI research: (1) decision-theoretic planning (DTP) and (2) multiagent systems. Both areas (especially the second) are attracting considerable interest, but work in multiagent systems often assumes either classical planning models or prespecified economic valuations on the part of the agents in question. By integrating models of DTP in multiagent systems research, more sophisticated multiagent planning scenarios can be accommodated, at the same time explaining precisely how agents determine their valuations for different sources or activities. I also briefly mention some opportunities afforded planning agents in multiagent settings and how these might be addressed.

There's More to Life Than Making Plans: Plan Management in Dynamic, Multiagent Environments

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.

All regular members is available by writing to ncai@aaai.

In this article, I describe several challenges facing the integration of two distinct lines of AI research: (1) decision-theoretic planning (DTP) and (2) multiagent systems. Both areas (especially the second) are attracting considerable interest, but work in multiagent systems often assumes either classical planning models or prespecified economic valuations on the part of the agents in question. By integrating models of DTP in multiagent systems research, more sophisticated multiagent planning scenarios can be accommodated, at the same time explaining precisely how agents determine their valuations for different sources or activities. I discuss several research challenges that emerge from this integration, involving the development of coordination protocols, the reasoning about lack of coordination, and the predicting of behavior in markets. I also briefly mention some opportunities afforded planning agents in multiagent settings and how these might be addressed.

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.

Complex, real-world domains require rethinking traditional approaches to AI planning. Planning and executing the resulting plans in a dynamic environment implies a continual approach in which planning and execution are interleaved, uncertainty in the current and projected world state is recognized and handled appropriately, and replanning can be performed when the situation changes or planned actions fail. Furthermore, complex planning and execution problems may require multiple computational agents and human planners to collaborate on a solution. In this article, we describe a new paradigm for planning in complex, dynamic environments, which we term distributed, continual planning (DCP). We argue that developing DCP systems will be necessary for planning applications to be successful in these environments. We give a historical overview of research leading to the current state of the art in DCP and describe research in distributed and continual planning.