Cooperative Epistemic Multi-Agent Planning for Implicit Coordination

Epistemic planning can be used for decision making in multi-agent situations with distributed knowledge and capabilities. Recently, Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) has been shown to provide a very natural and expressive framework for epistemic planning. We extend the DEL-based epistemic planning framework to include perspective shifts, allowing us to define new notions of sequential and conditional planning with implicit coordination. With these, it is possible to solve planning tasks with joint goals in a decentralized manner without the agents having to negotiate about and commit to a joint policy at plan time. First we define the central planning notions and sketch the implementation of a planning system built on those notions. Afterwards we provide some case studies in order to evaluate the planner empirically and to show that the concept is useful for multi-agent systems in practice.Comment: In Proceedings M4M9 2017, arXiv:1703.0173

Automata Techniques for Epistemic Protocol Synthesis

International audienceIn this work we aim at applying automata techniques to problems studied in Dynamic Epistemic Logic, such as epistemic planning. To do so, we first remark that repeatedly executing ad infinitum a propositional event model from an initial epistemic model yields a relational structure that can be finitely represented with automata. This correspondence, together with recent results on uniform strategies, allows us to give an alternative decidability proof of the epistemic planning problem for propositional events, with as by-products accurate upper-bounds on its time complexity, and the possibility to synthesize a finite word automaton that describes the set of all solution plans. In fact, using automata techniques enables us to solve a much more general problem, that we introduce and call epistemic protocol synthesis

Undecidability in Epistemic Planning

Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) provides a very expressive framework for multi-agent planning that can deal with nondeterminism, partial observability, sensing actions, and arbitrary nesting of beliefs about other agents’ beliefs. However, as we show in this paper, this expressiveness comes at a price. The planning framework is undecidable, even if we allow only purely epistemic actions (actions that change only beliefs, not ontic facts). Undecidability holds already in the S5 setting with at least 2 agents, and even with 1 agent in S4. It shows that multi-agent planning is robustly undecidable if we assume that agents can reason with an arbitrary nesting of beliefs about beliefs. We also prove a corollary showing undecidability of the DEL model checking problem with the star operator on actions (iteration)

Bisimulation and expressivity for conditional belief, degrees of belief, and safe belief

Plausibility models are Kripke models that agents use to reason about knowledge and belief, both of themselves and of each other. Such models are used to interpret the notions of conditional belief, degrees of belief, and safe belief. The logic of conditional belief contains that modality and also the knowledge modality, and similarly for the logic of degrees of belief and the logic of safe belief. With respect to these logics, plausibility models may contain too much information. A proper notion of bisimulation is required that characterises them. We define that notion of bisimulation and prove the required characterisations: on the class of image-finite and preimage-finite models (with respect to the plausibility relation), two pointed Kripke models are modally equivalent in either of the three logics, if and only if they are bisimilar. As a result, the information content of such a model can be similarly expressed in the logic of conditional belief, or the logic of degrees of belief, or that of safe belief. This, we found a surprising result. Still, that does not mean that the logics are equally expressive: the logics of conditional and degrees of belief are incomparable, the logics of degrees of belief and safe belief are incomparable, while the logic of safe belief is more expressive than the logic of conditional belief. In view of the result on bisimulation characterisation, this is an equally surprising result. We hope our insights may contribute to the growing community of formal epistemology and on the relation between qualitative and quantitative modelling

Knowledge-Based Programs as Plans: Succinctness and the Complexity of Plan Existence

Knowledge-based programs (KBPs) are high-level protocols describing the course of action an agent should perform as a function of its knowledge. The use of KBPs for expressing action policies in AI planning has been surprisingly overlooked. Given that to each KBP corresponds an equivalent plan and vice versa, KBPs are typically more succinct than standard plans, but imply more on-line computation time. Here we make this argument formal, and prove that there exists an exponential succinctness gap between knowledge-based programs and standard plans. Then we address the complexity of plan existence. Some results trivially follow from results already known from the literature on planning under incomplete knowledge, but many were unknown so far.Comment: 10 pages, Contributed talk at TARK 2013 (arXiv:1310.6382) http://www.tark.or

Automata Techniques for Epistemic Protocol Synthesis

In this work we aim at applying automata techniques to problems studied in Dynamic Epistemic Logic, such as epistemic planning. To do so, we first remark that repeatedly executing ad infinitum a propositional event model from an initial epistemic model yields a relational structure that can be finitely represented with automata. This correspondence, together with recent results on uniform strategies, allows us to give an alternative decidability proof of the epistemic planning problem for propositional events, with as by-products accurate upper-bounds on its time complexity, and the possibility to synthesize a finite word automaton that describes the set of all solution plans. In fact, using automata techniques enables us to solve a much more general problem, that we introduce and call epistemic protocol synthesis

On the Impact of Modal Depth in Epistemic Planning (Extended Version)

Epistemic planning is a variant of automated planning in the framework of dynamic epistemic logic. In recent works, the epistemic planning problem has been proved to be undecidable when preconditions of events can be epistemic formulas of arbitrary complexity , and in particular arbitrary modal depth. It is known however that when preconditions are propositional (and there are no postconditions), the problem is between Pspace and Expspace. In this work we bring two new pieces to the picture. First, we prove that the epistemic planning problem with propositional preconditions and without postconditions is in Pspace, and is thus Pspace-complete. Second, we prove that very simple epistemic preconditions are enough to make the epistemic planning problem undecidable: preconditions of modal depth at most two suffice