Historical milestone · 1988
IRMA and rational practical reasoning
Reviewed through September 18, 2026
1988 · Historical milestone
IRMA and rational practical reasoning
- Era
- 1980s
- Theme
- Agent planning & cognitive architectures
- Evidence form
- Architecture separated beliefs, desires, intentions, plan generation, filtering, and execution monitoring
- School / paradigm
- Belief-desire-intention
- Institution / context
- SRI / Stanford
- Researchers
- Michael Bratman; David Israel; Martha Pollack
Understand
Plain-language record, transferred from the reviewed source module.
Theory or experimental setup. Explained why bounded agents should commit to intentions rather than continually replan from scratch.
Result / historical claim. Formalized commitment can become inflexible under rapid change; belief revision and uncertainty were limited.
Apply
Professional implication, only where the reviewed record states one.
The checked-in record does not state a separate professional application for this entry. The topic page places it in the wider research lineage: .
Verify
Evidence status, stated limitations, and the external sources this record actually carries.
Evidence form. Architecture separated beliefs, desires, intentions, plan generation, filtering, and execution monitoring
Limitation / debate. Goal persistence, plan commitment, replanning thresholds, and durable agent state.
Source status. This milestone row does not carry a primary-source URL in the approved export, and we do not have a verified link for it in our own research. We do not guess one.
No primary-source URL is recorded for this entry in our reviewed data. Rather than manufacture a citation, we link the Implement Agentic research page that carries the record.
Reproduce
A reproduction tutorial is linked only when one exists for this exact record.
A reproduction tutorial is not yet available for this entry. The closest reviewed material is .
Cite or share
APA-like: This historical record carries a year only, and no author or publisher of record in the checked-in data. An APA reference would have to invent that metadata.
BibTeX: BibTeX requires an author and publication venue. Historical lineage entries store a narrative record and its source link, not structured authorship, so the field would be fabricated.