Ubicom Book Slides: Chapter 9: Intelligent Interaction

UbiCom Book Slides
1
Ubiquitous computing: smart devices,
environments and interaction
Chapter 9: Intelligent Interaction
(All Parts, Short Version)
Stefan Poslad
http://www.eecs.qmul.ac.uk/people/stefan/ubicom
Chapter 9: Overview
Chapter 9 focuses on:
Internal system properties: intelligence
External interaction with any of three types of environment
Focussing more on ICT and physical environment
These environments may be active, i.e., they are themselves one or
more intelligence systems

Ubiquitous computing: smart devices, environments and interaction
2
Five main properties for UbiCom
Handling Non-determinism
Knowledge & task sharing
Goal-based, etc.
3
4
Related Chapter Links
There are two AI chapters that are interlinked
Chapter 8, describes the design of single Intelligent System
or IS
These may be simple: use a single models of intelligence
These may be hybrid: use multiple heterogeneous intelligence
models
This Chapter 9, describes intelligent interaction between
multiple systems
The systems interacting may be intelligent (Chapter 8)
The systems interacting may not necessarily be intelligent but their
interaction may still be: emergent intelligence (Chapter 10)
Or Both
5
Related Chapter Links
Other Models of Interaction Multiplicity:
Service Interaction (Chapter 3)
Network Interaction (Chapter 11)
Each type of smart device to smart environment (device)
interaction can be enhanced by making them intelligent
CCI (Chapters 3 & 4)
CPI (Chapters 6 & 7)
HCI (chapter 5)

6
Chapter 9: Overview
The slides for this chapter are also expanded and split into
several parts
Part A: Interaction Multiplicity: Between peers
Part B: Interaction Multiplicity: Using Mediators
Part C: Cooperative Interaction
Part D: Competitive Interaction
Part E: Intelligent Interaction Protocols 1
Part F: Intelligent Interaction Protocols 2
Part G: Multi-Agent Systems
Part H: Social Interaction

7
Part A Overview
Basic Smart versus Intelligent Interaction?
Interaction Multiplicity
P2P Interaction between Multiple Senders and
Receivers
Unknown Sender and Malicious Senders
Unknown Receivers
Too Many Messages
9
Introduction
Deployment of UbiCom is ?

UbiCom device interaction ?

10
Basic (Smart) Interaction
P2P Interaction

Interaction that involves passive intermediaries

11
Intelligent (Smart) interaction
What is Intelligent (Smart) interaction?
Beyond using universal network communication protocols,
Involves Coordination
Use of Semantics
Communicate using a rich language
Organisational interaction
etc
Intelligent interaction is built upon basic interaction
12
Intelligent Interaction
2 dimensions of intelligent interaction
Interaction between multiple intelligent systems & their
environments
Intelligent Interaction between relatively non-intelligent
multiple systems & environments
13
Smart Device versus Intelligent Device
Interaction
Interaction between smart devices (Chapter 1):
Digital,
Connected,
Degree of local autonomous control, etc
Interaction between intelligent devices (Chapter 8):
Specific notions of intelligence,
e.g., reflexive, goal-based etc
Different degrees of intelligence (Chapter 13)
14
Intelligent Environment versus
Intelligent Interaction
Intelligent Environment:
Environment for a system, is intelligent

Environment may include other intelligent systems

Intelligent Interaction:
Interaction, between a system and its environment
(including other systems), is intelligent
15
Interaction multiplicity can occur in many different
components of UbiCom systems & their environments, e.g.,
ICT Environment (C)
Services (S)
Networks (N).
Human Environment (H)
Physical Environment (P)
16
Basic Interaction Multiplicity
Example: Service Invocation
Types of Interaction Multiplicity
Interaction multiplicity complexity of interaction. Why?

How to manage complexity of Interaction multiplicity?
.

19
Interaction Multiplicity Examples:
Communication
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

21
Part B Overview
Interaction using Mediators
Shared Communication Resource Access
Shared Computation Resource Access
Mediating Between Requesters and Providers

22
Mediated Interaction
Mediator: a go between interacting participants / peers
also referred to as 3rd parties, intermediaries, middleware -agents
Benefits:
Enhances peer discovery and service discovery
Etc

Disadvantages:
Performance drops as extra intermediate nodes / hops are used
etc

23
Mediated Interaction
The following types of mediated interaction:
Shared Communication Channel Access
Shared Computation Resource Access
Service Discovery
etc
Can be considered in terms of:
Motivation?
Challenges?
Handled by?

24
Mediating Between Requesters and
Providers
Mediators enhance peer discovery & service discovery

Instead of having to request information from each peer,
info. accessed in 1 place, a 3rd party at a well known,
static, address uses well standardised directory interface
2 types of information used in discovery process
service capability
Service preferences
Different designs for mediators exist depending on how
service capabilities or preferences are kept private versus
shared

25
W
h
o

K
n
o
w
s

R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s

&

P
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s

Who Knows Capabilities
Mediators
Mediator Design Issues
When are Mediators used during an interaction?
Support for anonymity
Mediators can be designed to support a range of different
representations for capabilities and preferences
Mediators can be designed to support different types of
interaction
Mediator fairness to providers
Trust & Neutrality

27
Mediators: Interaction Protocols
What interaction protocols should these different types of
mediator use?
Request-reply?
Asynchronous notifications?
Other protocols?
But how can we support richer & more flexible interaction?
See later
28
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

29
Part C Overview
Interaction using Cooperative Participants
Coordination Basics
Perfectly Coordinated Systems
Coordination design issues
Coordination through join intentions and plans
Coordination using Norms and Electronic Institutions
Hierarchical and Role-based Organisational Interaction
30
Interaction Multiplicity: Cooperative
Interaction
Cooperative interaction enables multiple systems to work
together.
Characterised by 2 main properties:
Coordination: synchronising activities
Cohesion: acting together (organisational interaction).

31
Interaction Multiplicity: Cooperative
Interaction
Cooperation is easier to manage when:
homogeneous designed systems interact;
there is centralised control;
systems are designed as pure servers
systems are designed statically to cooperate;
systems act benevolently and reliably.
Cooperation is harder to manage when:
different systems are designed by independent developers;
systems are designed to act autonomously;
systems support heterogeneous goals;
systems need to cooperate dynamically;
parties may act in a self-interested manner;
systems act malevolently and may non-deterministically
malfunction.

32
Cooperative Interaction: Pros and
Cons
33
Advantages of Cooperative Model Disadvantages of cooperative model
Distributed problem solving: solves it
quicker as more parts are processed in
parallel.
Cooperation reduces and
competition can
Delegation: Dont need to do everything
ourselves. Dont want to do it ourselves,
too time-consuming. Instead delegate
Communication, costs, unreliability
may outweigh the extra processing
benefits of the distribution.
Selection: select best option from a set of
candidates
Coordination & management is
more complex: disruptions (insider
attack), lack of understanding,
ambiguity, conflict.
Reliability: there are alternative options. Delegation and session initiation
costs too high
Social: agents act on behalf, to engage
people
Lack of control, privacy.
Cooperative Interaction: coordination
Explicit Coordinated Cooperation

Coordination using Norms and Electronic Institutions

Hierarchical and Role-based Organisational Interaction
34
Coordination: Classification
Message-based vs. process-based
Explicit vs. Implicit

Perfect vs. imperfect
etc
35
Coordination Design Issues
Whether or not ISs are spatially and or temporally
coincident, or not

Handling inconsistencies and uncertainty. How?

Who Coordinates?

36
Coordination Classification
Explicit coordination
Service composition(Section 3.3.4).
Interaction protocols with inbuilt coordination mechanisms
See later
Joint planning
Joint intentions

Implicit coordination
Norms and Electronic Institutions
Hierarchical & Role-based Organisational Interaction

37
UbiCom System Applications of
Social Organisations
Provide a flexible way to design a large range of
organisations
to dynamically configure building facilities to support
building energy efficiency;
for personalised work environments
for information integration and interoperability
information services for mobile users in which IS
dynamically adapt information to multiple contexts such as
location, person and ICT system.

38
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

39
Part D Overview
Interaction with Self-interested Participants
Market-based Interaction and Auctions
Negotiation and Agreements
Consensus-based Agreements

40
Competitive Interaction
Cooperation vs. Competition
cooperators share their goals with collaborating parties & act
together
competitors keep their goals private & act self-interestedly.to further
their own goals, rather on collaborating to help further others goals
As diverse smart autonomous, configurable, networked
devices in physical spaces, competitive interaction
Design models to solve the associated resource conflicts
and resource allocation problems will become essential.
E.g., in Smart utility regulation scenario.
Multiple autonomous lighting devices in smart environment, all seek
to switch themselves on but some are redundant & wastes energy.
Multiple users may seek to configure a shared or multiple devices
that overlap in function in multiple ways, e.g., multiple users wish to
regulate heating and lighting levels differently.

41
Competitive Interaction
Different types of competitive interaction problems and
designs depending on:
No. of players
interaction protocols;
Strategies;
Nature of the completion
Self-interested interaction is complicated further when
participants act maliciously, i.e., lie and collude.
42
Interaction Multiplicity: Competitive
Interaction Types
Market-based Interaction and Auctions: used to allocate
resources to individual requesters
Negotiation and Agreements: more general than auctions,
used in market places to agree terms but can also be more
generally used to resolve conflicts.
Convergence: a multi-step processes where two or more
entities iteratively reach an agreement. Convergence
algorithms and protocols tend to be domain specific
Consensus based protocols can be used to reach
agreement between multiple participants, but normally for
one object at one time, e.g., voting protocols

43
Competitive Interaction: Designs
A generic problem for UbiCom is allocation of limited
resources & services to multiple self-interested requestors.
Designs to manage this?
Control can be more generally acceded to a third party
Concurrency control (Section 9.2.2.2).
Policy based management (Section 12.2.8.4)
Market-based Interaction and Auctions
Negotiation and Agreements
Can we classify these designs into types of mediator
(passive versus active) & mediated versus non-mediated?
44
Auctions
Is 1 of oldest but still widely-used market based protocols
Designed to allocate resources such as goods and services
to one of the bidders.
Several types of auction protocol depending on
????
Auction Benefits
???

45
Auctions
Different types of auction?

English auction, can be classified in terms of the following
properties for bids:
a single type of goods
single attribute
single sided
ascending

46
Negotiation & Agreements
Auctions are designed to reach agreements between
sellers and consumers in a market-place
are considered to be a type of more general technique called
negotiation.
General aims of Negotiation is modification of local agent
policies to constrain interaction and plans of interaction,
e.g., in the case of negative (harmful) interactions, and identification
of situations where new potential interactions are possible and
beneficial.
Uses of negotiation in UbiCom?
task and resource allocation;
recognition of conflicts;
resolution of goal disparities;
determination of the organisational structure and hence for
organisational coherence.

47
Negotiation Design
In general a negotiation method has 4 principle components:
Public shared interaction protocol
Deal rule
Negotiation set
Strategies that are kept private
Design properties for negotiation protocols ?
pareto optimal,
stable
individually rational
support computation and communication efficiency

48
Negotiation Designs
Negotiation can be considered to be a distributed search
Search is through a space of potential agreements (chapter 8)
Game-theory is used to develop strategies between
competing players who strive to win a game
Argumentation-based negotiation allows additional
information to be exchanged, over and above proposals
Different problem domain models for negotiation
applications:
Task-based
State-based
Worth-based.

49
Consensus based interaction can be used to reach an agreement when
multiple self-interested participants share a common goal
Consensus is important when different participants or processes
interact such that their self-interested goals may conflict
Consensus refers both to a state of agreement that is reached by
independent participants and to the process to reach an agreement.
Consensus may also be useful in situations where there are several
alternatives but it is not clear which one alternative should be chosen,
In contrast to negotiation, consensus based agreements are simpler.
How?

50
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

51
Part E Overview
IS Interaction Design
Designing System Interaction to be more Intelligent
Designing Interaction between Individual Intelligent
Systems
Interaction Protocol Design
52
IS Interaction Design
2 basic dimensions to supporting intelligent interaction:
to design conventional system interaction to be intelligent
to design individual intelligent systems to interact

53
More Intelligent Conventional system
Interaction
Motivation
Mediation & handling heterogeneity
Reflection about communication
Distributed problem solving
Task delegation
Flexibility and Selection
Reliability

54
Interaction Between Individual ISs:
Motivation
Part of the motivation for individual intelligent systems to
interact with each other, is to handle the knowledge
bootstrapping problem. How?
Single intelligent entity needs to independently learn
everything it needs to know itself

Single intelligent entity would also need its own internal,
complete, knowledge model of the world and of itself,
55
IS Interaction: Design Issues
Interaction design issues:
If common, extensible message protocol can be designed
for use across multiple types of UbiCom interaction

If ISs need to share and fix a common understanding of
terms or concepts within a domain

If ISs need to share the some context associated with a
message,
56
IS Communication Protocols
Involves specifying 2 separate (sub-) application layer
protocols:
specifying individual messages (Message Protocols)
Specifying patterns of multiple messages (Interaction Protocols)
Message protocols define
????
Interaction protocols define
????

57
Interaction Protocol Types
Individual messages are not used in isolation but used in
different patterns of multiple messages
Classification of Interaction Protocols?
Information sharing vs. task sharing
Unicast versus Multicast
Pull versus Push
Syntactic versus Semantic versus Linguistic

58
Handling Interaction Failures
How can the following interaction failures be handled?
Network link failure
Receiver down, not ready
Wrong message syntax
Use wrong default values, types
Use of service constraints that cannot be satisfied by
provider
Unknown service providers and location
Client action, e.g., sender cancel
Messages as part of processes not coordinated
Semantic differences in use of terms at sender & receiver

59
Interaction Protocol Design Issues
Interaction protocols are often designed to be service-
specific and domain specific
-> service interoperability is challenging
Interaction protocols are fixed, not very extensible
Although multiple interaction protocols can be orchestrated
Can introduce interaction flexibility
through use of cooperative dialogues
Explicitly supporting, nesting, concurrency etc
Can add interaction richness
Through use of semantic protocols to define meaning, context of
interaction
But how to define the semantics
Using, OWL, Speech Acts?

60
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

61
Part F Overview
Semantic and Knowledge Sharing Protocols
ACLs and Linguistic-based Protocols
Examples of use of Interaction Protocols in PM Scenario
62
Semantics of Communication
Protocols
Communication protocols (CP) are specified in terms of
human-readable but not in machine-readable semantics.
Lack of a standard semantic representation for protocols
Can standard KRs for content, e.g., OWL, be used for CP?

63
IS Message Protocols Based Upon
Speech Acts
Based upon type of linguistic protocol called Speech Acts
Some speech utterances are like physical actions that
change the state of the world,
e.g., pronouncing someone as man & wife in a religious ceremony,
sending message to set a new fact that changes the state of KB.
Basic structure of speech act defines:
Type of action
Pre-conditions which if true enable actions to be triggered.
Post-conditions of effects define what should now be true if the action
was successfully executed.
The most useful types of communicative acts are
Assertives: set (information, facts, system states)
Directives: task requests, info. queries, mediating actions
Phatics: establish, check, prolong and interrupt, control comms

64
Speech Act Model Benefits
Why used be speech act-based interaction between ISs?
Rather than conventional communication protocols between Iss
Generic model of communicative acts could be used
across all knowledge domains, enhancing service
interoperability.
In contrast, currently, each application domain and even
multiple applications within that domain specify their own
sets of service actions.
This makes interoperability using service actions defined in
heterogeneous service models complex.
Some instantiation of service actions is needed to ground
the semantics
this could vary across services and service domains.
65
Speech Act
Semantic specifications for ACLs:
BDI
Contract programming model semantics
Semantic Commitments based upon social conventions
IP context can be used as the semantics for the
communicative act.
E.g., FIPA Interaction Protocol model makes a rudimentary attempt
at a social model in the sense that the interaction is related to the
organisational roles of the interacting parties and the semantics of
each CA in an IP is interpreted within the context of the IP.
66
Interaction Protocol Example:
Request
Specifications of communication using speech acts
how multiple communicative acts can be used as part of different
interaction patterns
how a communicative act links to the message content
Request interaction pattern
Classification: a task-sharing one-to-one pull type interaction
Although it seems similar to a client-server type request-
response pattern, it is more flexible in several ways
responder can optionally choose to acknowledge request & supply
the result later.
responder also has different options to signal:
lack of understanding of the request,
failure for some reason such as lack of sufficient ICT resources
refusal where although it could do the task for some reason, it chooses
not to.
67
68
ELEM007 Agents
Interaction Protocol Example:
Request
Interaction Protocol Use in PM
Scenario
As an example of the benefits of using rich and flexible
interaction protocols, resource access is considered during
personal memories (PM) scenario
e.g., accessing and displaying or playing audio-video content.
In the simple case, we invoke an AV-player (service)
passing the details of the source of the AV content of our
choice.
But when we play the AV source it fails, the system must
then decide how to proceed?

69
Scenario
Typically, requester asks for assistance by searching for
help in a well-known place a directory.
Once the requester finds a help assistance, the requester
can choose to delegate the resource access task to the
help assistant
providing some conditions were fulfilled such as authentication and
competency checks were fulfilled
70
Scenario
In more detail,
A Help peer registers itself with provider to be informed
when its fail to fulfil a request from a requester (a
subscribe).
The Help peer then announces itself to the requester. The
requester then queries Help about use of a resource X.
Help advices A to ask resource depository D something.
D tells the requester that peers E,F,G, H have resource X.
Requester issues a contract (a call for proposals or cfp) to
E,F,G,H to ask them to bid to supply the resource as A does
not know which of these can provide the resource most
favourably
etc.

71

Requester
Resource
Help Assistant
Resource
Repository
inform
request
query
inform
inform
query
inform
Scenario
Delegating task of resource access to a help assistant
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

73
Part G Overview
Multi-Agent Systems
ACL and Agent Platform Design
Multi-Agent System Application Design
Some Generic Intelligent Interaction Applications

74
Multi-Agent Systems (MAS)
Generally, if an IS is represented by an agent, then a MAS
represents multiple interacting IS.
When MAS interact with other MAS they represent systems
of systems interacting.
Can characterise the properties of MAS?
degree of dynamism
degree of scale (numbers of agents)
type of (organisational) control
homogeneous versus heterogeneous types of individual agent
type of agent interaction (e.g., goal exchange, belief exchange etc).
Use of an appropriate ACL (Agent Communication
Language) can support these MAS properties.

75
Agent Platform or Middleware Design
Common Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) consists of:
Agent Interaction Protocol Suite (AIPS): individual agents interact
using an Agent Communication Language
Agent Platform or Middleware accessed through some API
MAS Applications
76
Agent Platform or Middleware Design
Core agent middleware services typically include:
ACL interaction
agent name / agent life-cycle management
directory facilitator service
Should each service be an agent?

Several agent toolkits have been developed which support
the FIPA ACL and agent platforms , e.g., JADE
77
Agent Interaction Protocol Suite
In terms of the TCP/IP protocol suite,
ACL behaves as a suite of multi-layer protocols at the
application level
for this reason has been termed an AIPS or Agent Interaction
Protocol Suite or AIPS
Several protocols are needed to support interaction for
intelligent applications using communicative acts:
an interaction protocol
a communicative act protocols
a content protocol.
Content protocol may separate the content Ontology from a content
logic. Why?

78
Agent Interaction Protocol Suite
MAS Application Design
Many examples of IS or Agent-Oriented Software
Engineering (AOSE) methodologies (also called Agent-
Oriented Development or AOD).
There are 2 basic types:
those which extend or adapting non-Is system methodologies, e.g.,
object-oriented based AOSE
those based upon AI methodologies.
Hybrid methods

80
MAS Application Design
AOSE design can be captured in two main model views:
organisational view: specifies types of agents & roles
operational view: specifies interaction constrained by goals and
plans of actions to achieve those goals.
(Organisational) Roles support a more dynamic approach.
Roles used to separate responsibility for service access
from identity to:
enable agents to combine multiple roles;
enable several agents to play same role (redundancy);
enable agents to change roles at run time;
Plans: order system (internal) actions & (external)
interactions
interactions that determine the roles of entities in the organisation
.

81
Organisational Model for Part of PM
Scenario
Operational Model for Part of PM Scenario
Operational Model for Part of PM
Scenario
Example of an operational view is a simple task-oriented
description of a problem
Goal is to display images from the digital camera peer on
some (visual) display, i.e., part of the personal memories
scenario.
Goal is normally achieved using a very simple default plan
which in this case consists of a sequence of two actions:
AV source peer such as a digital camera or its storage media
requests use of image reading functions of an AV player which is
connected to a display
Provider then responds by signalling to the AV source that the
display is ready.
84
Chapter 9: Overview
several parts

85
Part H Overview
Social Networking & Media Exchange
Recommender Systems
Content-Based
Collaborative Filtering
Referral Systems
Pervasive Work Flow Management for People
Trust Management

86
Introduction
There are many intelligent interaction applications which
can be classified into:
CCI, e.g., autonomous systems;
HCI
CPI.
This section focuses on social type HCI type interaction
models and their application to CCI and CPI.

87
Social Networking and Media
Exchange
Humans have an instinctive need to communicate, to
socialise
Providing content for public and private access is now
cheap relative to the average standard of living.
Remote Social interaction
88
Exchange: Challenges
Remote Social interaction but at the expense of Local
social interaction

Inclusion: requires ICT resources not affordable for
everyone, everywhere?

New means of delivering content leaves us open to the
potential hazards that exist in the physical world?

89
Exchange: Semantics
Semantics used to enable semantic interoperability,.

This misuse can potentially benefit from the semantics.
Why?

90
Social Media
Social Media experience can take many different forms,
including text, images, audio, and video.
Popular mediums include:
Blogs & Microbloggs, e.g., twitter
Social networks,
Content communities (sometimes called folksonomies)
podcasts
wikis,
91
Social Media: Organisation
In general the trend is that large amounts of content is
created and shared by users and a stronger move to Web
as a user-driven application platform.
It is not feasible to expect even the diligent users to
annotate and add details to their content and organise this
in a methodical and consistent.
To help the users to manage and organize their content
requires certain contextual knowledge that comes from a
number of places
e.g. content annotations, semantic metadata, contact lists, the way
the user organises contact lists as family and friends, etc.

92
To organize content for users requires that a system has
certain pertinent and significant knowledge about users,
their context & habits.
Creation of contextual knowledge & use of contextual
knowledge can help user to manage & share their content
Challenge in any solution is in the way the knowledge is
aggregated to provide a contextual filter that can be applied
to the organization of the content.

93
There are different techniques to filter and organise media
Personalisation

Self-organisation

Self-governance
.

94
Recommender Systems
Recommenders are types of personalisation software

Is often viewed as crucial for e-commerce sites.

There are two main types of recommender system:
Content-based filtering
Collaborative-filtering
95
Recommender Systems
Examples of the use of recommender system for Ubicom?
96
Referrals
Referrals are trusted recommendations by known people,
in contrast to recommendations that are anonymous.
For serious life and business decisions, people often value
the opinion of a trusted expert more, rather than an
anonymous decision.
Discuss how referral (chains) work here
97
Pervasive Work Flow Management for
People
Physical distance is much less of a barrier for
communication and workflow
Virtual distance between employees in terms of differing
beliefs, systems and experiences is still a barrier.
Effectiveness of the cooperation between them. Why?
Lack of trust between different layers of organisation

Solutions?
98
Trust
Trust is an inherent property in UbiCom systems in which:
one autonomous component cannot completely control another
autonomous component
but which may need to rely or one another or require some
cooperation from it.
Trust in social organisations, is a general expectation,
explicitly, evaluated, that one autonomous component, the
truster, can rely on another autonomous component, the
trustee, in order to share information, tasks, goals, etc, with
them.
99
Trust Design Issues
There are several dimensions or metrics to specify trust for
use in open UbiCom systems?
personal trust or impersonal trust
the disposition of the truster to trust, which ranges from being
averse to trust to being eager to trust
if distrust is modelled as the complete absence of trust (zero trust)
or is considered in terms of negative metrics for trust
100
Trust-based Management
Social control based upon trust is sometimes referred to as
a soft security in contrast to hard security which is control
based on encryption type algorithms.
Soft security is viewed as a more effective mechanism for
security, in terms of robustness, scalability, and adaptability,
in pervasive environments such as information-sharing
communities that support inter-organisational interactions
The relationship or dependency of the truster on the trustee
is referred as a trust relation.

101
Social Trust Use in UbiCom
In many computer systems, although a notion of trust may
be implied, such as the use of a trusted platform, or a
trusted third party, there is often no explicit computation
model of trust incorporated.
Trust is more useful issue for external interaction rather
than internal interaction.
Internal interaction is often designed to use well-defined
notions of control which can obviate the need for trust.
In external interaction between one autonomous system
and its environment or another autonomous system, use of
a centralised control mechanism is not possible by design.
102
Social Trust Use in UbiCom
Sometimes there are concepts which are akin to trust used
in distributed systems?
System may define a QoS for another peer to provide
Requester can examine the collective reputation of another peer
before deciding to interact with it.
Peers are also often defined to be eager to trust, to blindly
trust, This is referred to as an ad hoc trust model.
e.g., if the provider has a service description in well-known directory
then the provider must be trustworthy, etc.
Of course the directory may offer no control or checks
about whether or not malicious providers can offer services
or malicious clients can search for services,
hence blind trust in the directory service can be associated with an
unknown trust relation between one peer and another.
103
Social Trust Models Use in UbiCom
Benefits?

Ways to incorporated trust in a computation form in
UbiCom systems.
Authentication-based policy systems based upon PKI.
Authorisation-based policy systems such as SPKI,
104
Social Trust Model Use in Intelligent
Systems
Many applications of multi-agent-system models use
collaborative type filtering mechanisms
E.g., based upon recommendations and reputations as well as
policy-based MAS models to support impersonal trust.
2 main aspects of design trust for Multiple IS.
to allow agents to trust each other -> need to endow them with the
ability to reason about reciprocative nature, reliability, or honesty of
their counterparts.
to design protocols and mechanisms of interactions such that
participants will find no better option than telling the truth and
interacting honestly with each other.
105
Summary & Revision
For each chapter
See book web-site for chapter summaries, references,
resources etc.
Identify new terms & concepts
Apply new terms and concepts: define, use in old and
new situations & problems
Debate problems, challenges and solutions
See Chapter exercises on web-site
106
Exercises: Define New Concepts

107
Exercise: Applying New Concepts

108

Ubicom Book Slides: Chapter 9: Intelligent Interaction

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ubicom Book Slides: Chapter 9: Intelligent Interaction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UbiCom Book Slides

You might also like