Volitional Multiagent Atomic Transactions: Describing People and their Machines
TLDR
Introduces "volitional multiagent atomic transactions," a formal model for distributed systems that explicitly includes both people's intentions and machine states.
Key contributions
- Proposes "volitional multiagent atomic transactions" to model systems with interacting people and machines.
- Defines agent state as volitional and machine states, with transactions requiring both machine preconditions and human willingness.
- Develops mathematical tools for safety/liveness and applies them to social networks and digital assets.
- Introduces a novel, simpler definition of 'grassroots' platforms, validating existing and new examples.
Why it matters
Existing distributed system models often overlook human involvement, especially in grassroots platforms. This paper bridges that gap by formally integrating human volition with machine states, enabling more accurate design and verification of complex human-machine systems.
Original Abstract
Formal models for concurrent and distributed systems describe machines; the people who operate them are either ignored or treated as external environment. Yet key distributed systems -- notably grassroots platforms -- include people operating their personal machines (smartphones), and their faithful description must include the states of both people and machines and how they jointly effect system behaviour. Here, we propose volitional multiagent atomic transactions -- executed atomically by machines and guarded by their people's volitions -- as a novel mathematical foundation for specifying systems consisting of people operating machines. Each agent's state consists of a volitional state and machine state; a transaction is enabled when the machine precondition holds and the guarding persons are willing. For example, befriending two people is guarded by both; unfriending, by either; voluntary swap of coins and bonds is guarded by both parties, while a payment is guarded by the payer. We develop the mathematical machinery to express safety and liveness of platforms specified in this framework, and provide example specifications of two grassroots platforms: social networks, and coins and bonds. These specifications are then used by AI to derive working implementations. % We employ here a novel and simpler definition of `grassroots' that better captures the informal notion -- multiple instances can form and operate independently, yet may coalesce -- and show that the platforms specified here, as well as those hitherto proven grassroots under the original definition, are grassroots under the new definition.
📬 Weekly AI Paper Digest
Get the top 10 AI/ML arXiv papers from the week — summarized, scored, and delivered to your inbox every Monday.