# Comparison of Multi-Agent Platform Usability for Industrial-Grade Applications
## 2 Related Works
In the latest proceedings of AAMAS [33], agents were introduced mostly as a tool stimulating research into other scientific domains. On the other hand, although the proceedings of EMAS [34] centre around agent-based systems, software engineering aspects are no longer explicitly addressed. It can be argued that rather than being used as an important component for building contemporary software systems, agents have evolved into a tool to study scientific problems from various domains, which may also be one of the reasons for the lack of AOSE's industrial acceptance. In this context, some studies have attempted to analyse the progress and barriers to the popularisation of MAS. For instance, a survey [35] examined AOSE-based systems deployed across various industries, summarising data from 152 applications. However, only 89 applications were confirmed as active, suggesting that many developed in the 2000s are no longer maintained. The survey also revealed that 69% of these applications were developed in collaboration with academic institutions, and only 31% were implemented solely by industrial or government entities. Additionally, 61% of the applications were initiated by academia, highlighting a lack of interest, awareness, and/or trust in MAS solutions among the enterprises. The survey further noted that of the 46 applications that reached TRL 8-9, 30 were implemented in collaboration with industry partners. Interestingly, (1) over 45% of these applications utilised Java-based agent platforms, and (2) the majority of them were built on existing AOSE tools, underscoring their importance. However, this survey was conducted nearly a decade ago, making its relevance today questionable. Moreover, it focused on the distribution of MAS applications in the market without delving into specific factors influencing presented outcomes. In another study [36], key factors influencing the industrial acceptance of MAS were analysed. The authors categorised these factors into design, technology, algorithms, standardisation, application, cost, and the ability to address field-specific challenges. Despite including input from various industrial experts, most respondents were from academic backgrounds, with 80% having at least four years of experience with agent systems. This reliance on academic respondents may have skewed the results, as they were already inclined to believe in the viability of AOSE for system development. This could explain why 68% of respondents agreed that industrial agents were sufficiently mature for production use. The study, however, lacked input from non-agent-related enterprise companies, limiting its scope. Additionally, while it identified general areas for improvement, it did not specify which aspects of AOSE were mature and which required further development. It is also worth noting that this study was conducted in 2015, potentially rendering some of its conclusions outdated. A more recent analysis of the barriers to MAS implementation and adoption was summarised in [37]. Unlike previous surveys, the study focused on specific challenges limiting the practical use of MAS, such as a lack of general understanding of MAS concepts, insufficient standardisation and specification, limited flexibility of MAS development technologies, and difficulties in benchmarking and validation. The study also outlined prospects for MAS development in industries such as aerospace, smart grids, mobility, and healthcare. Among all reviewed works, this study provided the most comprehensive commercial perspective, though it did not delve into technological limitations. Notably, it highlighted the persistence of benchmarking and validation issues, echoing concerns raised by earlier works [38]. Although there have been efforts to introduce benchmarking in agent systems [39], these initiatives have not been followed by further discussion and development(s). As these publications demonstrate, few have evaluated the status of AOSE in commercial use, and most focus on general concerns rather than addressing specific technological details.