On the Complexity of ATL and ATL* Module Checking

Module checking has been introduced in late 1990s to verify open systems, i.e., systems whose behavior depends on the continuous interaction with the environment. Classically, module checking has been investigated with respect to specifications given as CTL and CTL* formulas. Recently, it has been shown that CTL (resp., CTL*) module checking offers a distinctly different perspective from the better-known problem of ATL (resp., ATL*) model checking. In particular, ATL (resp., ATL*) module checking strictly enhances the expressiveness of both CTL (resp., CTL*) module checking and ATL (resp. ATL*) model checking. In this paper, we provide asymptotically optimal bounds on the computational cost of module checking against ATL and ATL*, whose upper bounds are based on an automata-theoretic approach. We show that module-checking for ATL is EXPTIME-complete, which is the same complexity of module checking against CTL. On the other hand, ATL* module checking turns out to be 3EXPTIME-complete, hence exponentially harder than CTL* module checking.Comment: In Proceedings GandALF 2017, arXiv:1709.0176

Reasoning about Knowledge and Strategies: Epistemic Strategy Logic

In this paper we introduce Epistemic Strategy Logic (ESL), an extension of Strategy Logic with modal operators for individual knowledge. This enhanced framework allows us to represent explicitly and to reason about the knowledge agents have of their own and other agents' strategies. We provide a semantics to ESL in terms of epistemic concurrent game models, and consider the corresponding model checking problem. We show that the complexity of model checking ESL is not worse than (non-epistemic) Strategy LogicComment: In Proceedings SR 2014, arXiv:1404.041

The Logic of Joint Ability in Two-Player Tacit Games

Logics of joint strategic ability have recently received attention, with arguably the most influential being those in a family that includes Coalition Logic (CL) and Alternating-time Temporal Logic (ATL). Notably, both CL and ATL bypass the epistemic issues that underpin Schelling-type coordination problems, by apparently relying on the meta-level assumption of (perfectly reliable) communication between cooperating rational agents. Yet such epistemic issues arise naturally in settings relevant to ATL and CL: these logics are standardly interpreted on structures where agents move simultaneously, opening the possibility that an agent cannot foresee the concurrent choices of other agents. In this paper we introduce a variant of CL we call Two-Player Strategic Coordination Logic (SCL2). The key novelty of this framework is an operator for capturing coalitional ability when the cooperating agents cannot share strategic information. We identify significant differences in the expressive power and validities of SCL2 and CL2, and present a sound and complete axiomatization for SCL2. We briefly address conceptual challenges when shifting attention to games with more than two players and stronger notions of rationality

Situation awareness and ability in coalitions

This paper proposes a discussion on the formal links between the Situation Calculus and the semantics of interpreted systems as far as they relate to Higher-Level Information Fusion tasks. Among these tasks Situation Analysis require to be able to reason about the decision processes of coalitions. Indeed in higher levels of information fusion, one not only need to know that a certain proposition is true (or that it has a certain numerical measure attached), but rather needs to model the circumstances under which this validity holds as well as agents' properties and constraints. In a previous paper the authors have proposed to use the Interpreted System semantics as a potential candidate for the unification of all levels of information fusion. In the present work we show how the proposed framework allow to bind reasoning about courses of action and Situation Awareness. We propose in this paper a (1) model of coalition, (2) a model of ability in the situation calculus language and (3) a model of situation awareness in the interpreted systems semantics. Combining the advantages of both Situation Calculus and the Interpreted Systems semantics, we show how the Situation Calculus can be framed into the Interpreted Systems semantics. We illustrate on the example of RAP compilation in a coalition context, how ability and situation awareness interact and what benefit is gained. Finally, we conclude this study with a discussion on possible future works

Domain-Specific Modeling and Code Generation for Cross-Platform Multi-Device Mobile Apps

Nowadays, mobile devices constitute the most common computing device. This new computing model has brought intense competition among hardware and software providers who are continuously introducing increasingly powerful mobile devices and innovative OSs into the market. In consequence, cross-platform and multi-device development has become a priority for software companies that want to reach the widest possible audience. However, developing an application for several platforms implies high costs and technical complexity. Currently, there are several frameworks that allow cross-platform application development. However, these approaches still require manual programming. My research proposes to face the challenge of the mobile revolution by exploiting abstraction, modeling and code generation, in the spirit of the modern paradigm of Model Driven Engineering

Reasoning About Strategies: On the Model-Checking Problem

In open systems verification, to formally check for reliability, one needs an appropriate formalism to model the interaction between agents and express the correctness of the system no matter how the environment behaves. An important contribution in this context is given by modal logics for strategic ability, in the setting of multi-agent games, such as ATL, ATL\star, and the like. Recently, Chatterjee, Henzinger, and Piterman introduced Strategy Logic, which we denote here by CHP-SL, with the aim of getting a powerful framework for reasoning explicitly about strategies. CHP-SL is obtained by using first-order quantifications over strategies and has been investigated in the very specific setting of two-agents turned-based games, where a non-elementary model-checking algorithm has been provided. While CHP-SL is a very expressive logic, we claim that it does not fully capture the strategic aspects of multi-agent systems. In this paper, we introduce and study a more general strategy logic, denoted SL, for reasoning about strategies in multi-agent concurrent games. We prove that SL includes CHP-SL, while maintaining a decidable model-checking problem. In particular, the algorithm we propose is computationally not harder than the best one known for CHP-SL. Moreover, we prove that such a problem for SL is NonElementarySpace-hard. This negative result has spurred us to investigate here syntactic fragments of SL, strictly subsuming ATL\star, with the hope of obtaining an elementary model-checking problem. Among the others, we study the sublogics SL[NG], SL[BG], and SL[1G]. They encompass formulas in a special prenex normal form having, respectively, nested temporal goals, Boolean combinations of goals and, a single goal at a time. About these logics, we prove that the model-checking problem for SL[1G] is 2ExpTime-complete, thus not harder than the one for ATL\star

A Model-based transformation process to validate and implement high-integrity systems

Despite numerous advances, building High-Integrity Embedded systems remains a complex task. They come with strong requirements to ensure safety, schedulability or security properties; one needs to combine multiple analysis to validate each of them. Model-Based Engineering is an accepted solution to address such complexity: analytical models are derived from an abstraction of the system to be built. Yet, ensuring that all abstractions are semantically consistent, remains an issue, e.g. when performing model checking for assessing safety, and then for schedulability using timed automata, and then when generating code. Complexity stems from the high-level view of the model compared to the low-level mechanisms used. In this paper, we present our approach based on AADL and its behavioral annex to refine iteratively an architecture description. Both application and runtime components are transformed into basic AADL constructs which have a strict counterpart in classical programming languages or patterns for verification. We detail the benefits of this process to enhance analysis and code generation. This work has been integrated to the AADL-tool support OSATE2

b tagging in ATLAS and CMS

Many physics signals presently studied at the high energy collision experiments lead to final states with jets originating from heavy flavor quarks. This report reviews the algorithms for heavy flavor jets identification developed by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations in view of the Run2 data taking period at the Large Hadron Collider. The improvements of the algorithms used in 2015 and 2016 data analyses with respect to previous data taking periods are discussed, as well as the ongoing developments in view of the next years of data taking. The measurements of the performance of the algorithms on data as well as the dedicated techniques for the identification of heavy flavor jets in events with boosted topologies are also presented. Finally, the effectiveness of heavy flavor jet identification in the complex environment expected during the high luminosity LHC phase is discussed.Comment: 6 pages, Proceeding for the Fifth Annual Large Hadron Collider Physics (LHCP2017) conferenc