How does Web 2.0 give a push to Agents? Before, Systems were standalone , and everything planned in advance. With Web 2.0 everything is connected and too complex to manage by one person. We need to look at what works successfully in real life. Just as Market economies overcame the ‘Command and control’ of communism, so Agents will overcome the Command and control of Objects. It may not be perfect, but it will be (slightly) better.
Will agents replace Java and .Net ? A sign that ‘the future is already here’ is that when you read the list ‘what makes an agent’ , you may go ‘but we’re doing that now’. Java and .Net have been around for so long now that it’s easy to forget the Object Orientated Programming (OOP) was once a radical new departure. It’s also easy to forget that languages such as C++, Visual Basic 6 and Powerbuilder were once ‘king of the hill’ and commanded respect from your colleagues when you mentioned your latest project was using them.
So what are agents? Compared to Objects :
- Agents act in their own self interest , they may decline a request if they think it makes them better off.Objects always respond to a request.
- Agents have their own thread of control , 1 for each agent. Objects may have their own thread, but most objects don’t. – Agents are pro-active, and seek to improve their lot , according to pre-defined goals.
- Agents are ‘Coarse Grained’ that is, a system will probably have a few agents will a lot of normal , dependent , objects. It’s similar to the way Enterprise Java Beans are used : not everything is an EJB , and there a still lots of Plain Old java Objects.
- Objects are designed from the start to work together. Agents can be written by different people , perhaps with widely different goals in mind.
Just like C++ was a procedural language with object orientated ‘bits’ attached, Agents are currently implmented in languages like Java , with agent-y bits attached. Probably the most useful set of bits is Cougaar. Cougaar is an open source project with a live community at Cougaarforge and an Eclipse based IDE. Cougaar gives you the basic infrastructure for creating and managing agents.
Of course , there’s nothing to stop you building your own agents. According to the above definition, most systems that have workflow tieing together entities making decisions according to their own business rules are not far off being agents. Especially when they have a scheduler (i.e. their own ‘thread of control’).
What do you think? Leave a comment below.
Paul,
Interesting comment that you made concerning Cougaar and agent technology. What’s your experience with agent technology and Cougaar?
William,
Covered agents as part of my Masters in UCD Dublin- the same Masters that sparked my interest in Business Rules (hence the link to the Drools book I since wrote on the top right hand side of the this blog!).
In both cases the course suggested an academic framework (for Rules and Agents). My mercenary consulting instincts kicked in , and sought out commercial frameworks instead – for agents this was Cougaar.
Since then I’ve completed a dissertation covering Agents as a small part (less than 10%). It was Agents in an enterprise context i.e. mimicking agents using more acceptable JBoss technology using Rules and Workflow. Nothing wrong with Cougaar (it’s hard to argue against the Darpa sponsorship!) but many business are nervous about being the first to use a ‘new’ technology – even it it’s written in Java.
In summary: Used Cougaar in an academic context, wish I would have used it commercially!
Paul