1,441 research outputs found
Bounded Situation Calculus Action Theories
In this paper, we investigate bounded action theories in the situation
calculus. A bounded action theory is one which entails that, in every
situation, the number of object tuples in the extension of fluents is bounded
by a given constant, although such extensions are in general different across
the infinitely many situations. We argue that such theories are common in
applications, either because facts do not persist indefinitely or because the
agent eventually forgets some facts, as new ones are learnt. We discuss various
classes of bounded action theories. Then we show that verification of a
powerful first-order variant of the mu-calculus is decidable for such theories.
Notably, this variant supports a controlled form of quantification across
situations. We also show that through verification, we can actually check
whether an arbitrary action theory maintains boundedness.Comment: 51 page
Specification and Verification of Commitment-Regulated Data-Aware Multiagent Systems
In this paper we investigate multi agent systems whose agent interaction is based on social commitments that evolve over time, in presence of (possibly incomplete) data. In particular, we are interested in modeling and verifying how data maintained by the agents impact on the dynamics of such systems, and on the evolution of their commitments. This requires to lift the commitment-related conditions studied in the literature, which are typically based on propositional logics, to a first-order setting. To this purpose, we propose a rich framework for modeling data-aware commitment-based multiagent systems. In this framework, we study verification of rich temporal properties, establishing its decidability under the condition of “state-boundedness”, i.e., data items come from an infinite domain but, at every time point, each agent can store only a bounded number of them
Progression and Verification of Situation Calculus Agents with Bounded Beliefs
We investigate agents that have incomplete information and make decisions based on their beliefs expressed as situation calculus bounded action theories. Such theories have an infinite object domain, but the number of objects that belong to fluents at each time point is bounded by a given constant. Recently, it has been shown that verifying temporal properties over such theories is decidable. We take a first-person view and use the theory to capture what the agent believes about the domain of interest and the actions affecting it. In this paper, we study verification of temporal properties over online executions. These are executions resulting from agents performing only actions that are feasible according to their beliefs. To do so, we first examine progression, which captures belief state update resulting from actions in the situation calculus. We show that, for bounded action theories, progression, and hence belief states, can always be represented as a bounded first-order logic theory. Then, based on this result, we prove decidability of temporal verification over online executions for bounded action theories. © 2015 The Author(s
Synthesizing and executing plans in Knowledge and Action Bases
We study plan synthesis for a variant of Knowledge and Action Bases (KABs). KABs have been recently introduced as a rich, dynamic framework where states are full-fledged description logic (DL) knowledge bases (KBs) whose extensional part is manipulated by actions that can introduce new objects from an infinite domain. We show that, in general, plan existence over KABs is undecidable even under severe restrictions. We then focus on the class of state-bounded KABs, for which plan existence is decidable, and we provide sound and complete plan synthesis algorithms, through a novel combination of techniques based on standard planning, DL query answering, and finite-state abstractions. All results hold for any DL with decidable query answering. We finally show that for lightweight DLs, plan synthesis can be compiled into standard ADL planning. © 2016, CEUR-WS. All rights reserved
Plan Synthesis for Knowledge and Action Bases
We study plan synthesis for a variant of Knowledge and Action Bases (KABs), a rich, dynamic framework, where states are description logic (DL) knowledge bases (KBs) whose extensional part is manipulated by actions that possibly introduce new objects from an infinite domain. We show that plan existence over KABs is undecidable even under severe restrictions. We then focus on state-bounded KABs, a class for which plan existence is decidable, and provide sound and complete plan synthesis algorithms, which combine techniques based on standard planning, DL query answering, and finite-state abstraction. All results hold for any DL with decidable query answering. We finally show that for lightweight DLs, plan synthesis can be compiled into standard ADL planning
An Introduction to Mechanized Reasoning
Mechanized reasoning uses computers to verify proofs and to help discover new
theorems. Computer scientists have applied mechanized reasoning to economic
problems but -- to date -- this work has not yet been properly presented in
economics journals. We introduce mechanized reasoning to economists in three
ways. First, we introduce mechanized reasoning in general, describing both the
techniques and their successful applications. Second, we explain how mechanized
reasoning has been applied to economic problems, concentrating on the two
domains that have attracted the most attention: social choice theory and
auction theory. Finally, we present a detailed example of mechanized reasoning
in practice by means of a proof of Vickrey's familiar theorem on second-price
auctions
Designing Normative Theories for Ethical and Legal Reasoning: LogiKEy Framework, Methodology, and Tool Support
A framework and methodology---termed LogiKEy---for the design and engineering
of ethical reasoners, normative theories and deontic logics is presented. The
overall motivation is the development of suitable means for the control and
governance of intelligent autonomous systems. LogiKEy's unifying formal
framework is based on semantical embeddings of deontic logics, logic
combinations and ethico-legal domain theories in expressive classic
higher-order logic (HOL). This meta-logical approach enables the provision of
powerful tool support in LogiKEy: off-the-shelf theorem provers and model
finders for HOL are assisting the LogiKEy designer of ethical intelligent
agents to flexibly experiment with underlying logics and their combinations,
with ethico-legal domain theories, and with concrete examples---all at the same
time. Continuous improvements of these off-the-shelf provers, without further
ado, leverage the reasoning performance in LogiKEy. Case studies, in which the
LogiKEy framework and methodology has been applied and tested, give evidence
that HOL's undecidability often does not hinder efficient experimentation.Comment: 50 pages; 10 figure
Verification of Agent-Based Artifact Systems
Artifact systems are a novel paradigm for specifying and implementing
business processes described in terms of interacting modules called artifacts.
Artifacts consist of data and lifecycles, accounting respectively for the
relational structure of the artifacts' states and their possible evolutions
over time. In this paper we put forward artifact-centric multi-agent systems, a
novel formalisation of artifact systems in the context of multi-agent systems
operating on them. Differently from the usual process-based models of services,
the semantics we give explicitly accounts for the data structures on which
artifact systems are defined. We study the model checking problem for
artifact-centric multi-agent systems against specifications written in a
quantified version of temporal-epistemic logic expressing the knowledge of the
agents in the exchange. We begin by noting that the problem is undecidable in
general. We then identify two noteworthy restrictions, one syntactical and one
semantical, that enable us to find bisimilar finite abstractions and therefore
reduce the model checking problem to the instance on finite models. Under these
assumptions we show that the model checking problem for these systems is
EXPSPACE-complete. We then introduce artifact-centric programs, compact and
declarative representations of the programs governing both the artifact system
and the agents. We show that, while these in principle generate infinite-state
systems, under natural conditions their verification problem can be solved on
finite abstractions that can be effectively computed from the programs. Finally
we exemplify the theoretical results of the paper through a mainstream
procurement scenario from the artifact systems literature
On First-Order ÎĽ-Calculus over Situation Calculus Action Theories
In this paper we study verification of situation calculus action theories against first-order mu-calculus with quantification across situations. Specifically, we consider mu-La and mu-Lp, the two variants of mu-calculus introduced in the literature for verification of data-aware processes. The former requires that quantification ranges over objects in the current active domain, while the latter additionally requires that objects assigned to variables persist across situations. Each of these two logics has a distinct corresponding notion of bisimulation. In spite of the differences we show that the two notions of bisimulation collapse for dynamic systems that are generic, which include all those systems specified through a situation calculus action theory. Then, by exploiting this result, we show that for bounded situation calculus action theories, mu-La and mu-Lp have exactly the same expressive power. Finally, we prove decidability of verification of mu-La properties over bounded action theories, using finite faithful abstractions. Differently from the mu-Lp case, these abstractions must depend on the number of quantified variables in the mu-La formula
- …