## 3 Results: AGA Logic Variables for Scene Description and Dialog Communications
### Communication Module and the Dialog Protocol
The common structure of request and reply phrases for the dialog of agents was presented in Section 3. It provides the basic protocol for communications of various robots, including terminals and state regulators. Any phrase contains the header and one or several content parts, which may deliver a new notation to be written or a request to be extracted from LL. The algorithm and the microassembler program, which were presented in Table 6 and Algorithm 2 in Section 3, can find correct content parts for the correctly addressed header. All phrase parts can be written to one memory buffer. Data are represented in the truth-level code. The procession of the header part is out of the LL competence, but the content part of phrase (see Table 6) has six free fields for the content transfer. The example, which also was partially used in Section 3, is given further. It demonstrates the request of the state regulator to compare the declared by the robot digital license ID with the fixed by the terminal one. This request should use the following set, consisting of eight numbers to be given in the content part:

{Assigned hash value of the content part of the phrase = 209};

{Necessary action = Show K-code for a word in \(w_{N}^{p,\text{m}}\) = 196};

{Number of object's vocabulary = v = 3};

{Number of object's vocabulary = m = 12};

{Number of objects in the vocabulary = \(w_{N}^{p,\text{m}}\) = 6};

{Declared/Questionable code name \(w_{K}^{p,\text{m}}\) = 221};

{Hash (i.e., parole) for access to the group of vocabularies, including \(V_{K}^{\text{m}}\) = 147};

{Total coefficient sum of the content part of the phrase = 167}. The first field is the tag of the phrase part, and the last one is the control coefficient sum of this part, which helps to find it correctly in the buffer memory. The format to represent data for any LL, including adapted variants, is the same for all versions of LL and suppose six 8-byte numbers:

{Word code in natural numbers \(w_{\text{K}}^{\text{v,m}}\) = \(\{1\div 16\}\)];

{Number of row in vocabulary matrix, v = \(\{1\div 16\}\)];

{Number of column in vocabulary matrix, m = \(\{1\div 16\}\)];

{Addresser's approving hash, h\({}_{\text{(m,0)}}^{\text{v,m}}\) = \(\{1\div 256\}\)];

{Sender's approving hash, h\({}_{\text{v,m}}\) = \(1\div 256\}\)];

{Word code in truth levels, \(w_{\text{K}}^{\text{v,m}}\) = \(\{1\div 256\}\)]. ### Step 3: Choice of LL Function and Its Adapted Versions

As various specialized agents may be allowed to use only selected groups of vocabularies, they should keep in memory the preliminary given table of access paroles, i.e., fixed hashes h\({}_{\text{v,m}}\), and approval hashes h\({}^{\text{(m,0)}}\), which principally may be chosen different for various groups of robots. To provide such access, necessary sets of fixed paroles should be accumulated as words in vocabularies \(V_{L}^{1,2}\), \(V_{L}^{1,3}\). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{“Hash Value”} \\ \hline Number of rows in vocabulary matrix, vocabulary & Number of columns in vocabulary vocabulary & Word code in natural language & Word code in natural-number & Addresser’s & Sender’s & Sender’s \\  & vocabulary & \(w_{\text{L}_{\text{S}}}^{\text{v,m}}\) = & code = w\({}_{\text{L}_{\text{S}}}^{\text{N}}\) & w\({}_{\text{L}_{\text{S}}}^{\text{K}}\) = 175 &
\begin{tabular}{c} high \\ high \\ h\({}_{\text{v,m}}\) = 75 \\ \end{tabular} \\ \(\text{v}=1\) & matrix, m = 8 & “hash value” & = 23 & \(\text{h}_{\text{v,m}}^{\text{(m,0)}}\) = 83 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: _Cont._Complicated schemes of AGA-based LL proposed in [68; 69] are intended for intense data approving by external network agents, and it seems reasonable to envisage adapted versions of LL for mass platforms and tasks, where data are confidential for mass replication, but the number of collaborating agents and approving external \"witnesses\" is small. An unreliable network also creates the same problem. Then, the number of approving hash values \(h\) is limited by the pair of participants of the dialog.