@inproceedings{singh_chopra_2010, title={Programming multiagent systems without programming agents}, volume={5919}, booktitle={Programming multi-agent systems}, author={Singh, M. P. and Chopra, A. K.}, year={2010}, pages={1–14} }
 @article{singh_chopra_desai_2009, title={Commitment-Based Service-Oriented Architecture}, volume={42}, ISSN={["0018-9162"]}, url={http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-70350222918&partnerID=MN8TOARS}, DOI={10.1109/MC.2009.347}, abstractNote={Existing service-oriented architectures are formulated in terms of low-level abstractions far removed from business services. In a new SOA, the components are business services and the connectors are patterns, modeled as commitments, that support key elements of service engagements.}, number={11}, journal={COMPUTER}, author={Singh, Munindar P. and Chopra, Amit K. and Desai, Nirmit}, year={2009}, month={Nov}, pages={72–79} }
 @article{desai_mallya_chopra_singh_2005, title={Interaction Protocols as design abstractions for business processes}, volume={31}, ISSN={["1939-3520"]}, url={http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-33745865103&partnerID=MN8TOARS}, DOI={10.1109/TSE.2005.140}, abstractNote={Business process modeling and enactment are notoriously complex, especially in open settings, where business partners are autonomous, requirements must be continually finessed, and exceptions frequently arise because of real-world or organizational problems. Traditional approaches, which attempt to capture processes as monolithic flows, have proven inadequate in addressing these challenges. We propose (business) protocols as components for developing business processes. A protocol is an abstract, modular, publishable specification of an interaction among different roles to be played by different participants. When instantiated with the participants' internal policies, protocols yield concrete business processes. Protocols are reusable and refinable, thus simplifying business process design. We show how protocols and their composition are theoretically founded in the phi;-calculus.}, number={12}, journal={IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING}, author={Desai, N and Mallya, AU and Chopra, AK and Singh, MP}, year={2005}, month={Dec}, pages={1015–1027} }
 @article{singh_chopra_desai_mallya_2004, title={Protocols for processes}, volume={39}, ISSN={0362-1340}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1052883.1052893}, DOI={10.1145/1052883.1052893}, abstractNote={
            The modeling and enactment of business processes is being recognized as key to modern information managment. The expansion of Web services has increased the attention given to processes, because processes are how services are composed and put to good use. However, current approaches are inadequate for flexibly modeling and enacting processes. These approaches take a logically centralized view of processes, treating a process as an implementation of a composed service. They provide low-level scripting languages to specify how a service may be implemented, rather than what interactions are expected from it. Consequently, existing approaches fail to adequately accommodate the essential properties of the business partners in a process (the partners would be realized via services)---their
            autonomy
            (freedom of action),
            heterogeneity
            (freedom of design), and
            dynamism
            (freedom of configuration).Flexibly represented
            protocols
            can provide a more natural basis for specifying processes. Protocols specify
            what
            rather than
            how
            ; thus they naturally maximize the authonomy, heterogeneity, and dynamism of the interacting parties. We are developing an approach for modeling and enacting business processes based on protocols. This paper describes some elements of (1) a conceptual model of processes that will incorporate abstractions based on protocols, roles, and commitments; (2)the semantics or mathematical foundations underlying the conceptual model and mapping global views of processes to the local actions of the parties involved; (3) methodologies involving rule-based reasoning to specify processes in terms of compositions of protocols.
          }, number={12}, journal={ACM SIGPLAN Notices}, publisher={Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)}, author={Singh, Munindar P. and Chopra, Amit K. and Desai, Nirmit and Mallya, Ashok U.}, year={2004}, month={Dec}, pages={73} }
 @article{chopra_singh_2003, title={Nonmonotonic commitment machines}, volume={2922}, ISBN={3540207694}, url={https://publons.com/publon/21294496/}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-540-24608-4_11}, abstractNote={Protocols for multiagent interaction need to be flexible because of the open and dynamic nature of multiagent systems. Such protocols cannot be modeled adequately via finite state machines (FSMs) as FSM representations lead to rigid protocols. We propose a commitment-based formalism called Nonmonotonic Commitment Machines (NCMs) for representing multiagent interaction protocols. In this approach, we give semantics to states and actions in a protocol in terms of commitments. Protocols represented as NCMs afford the agent flexibility in interactions with other agents. In particular, situations in protocols when nonmonotonic reasoning is required can be efficiently represented in NCMs.}, journal={Lecture Notes in Computer Science}, publisher={Berlin; New York: Springer}, author={Chopra, A. and Singh, Munindar P.}, year={2003}, pages={183–200} }