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

Minimal Proof Search for Modal Logic K Model Checking

Most modal logics such as S5, LTL, or ATL are extensions of Modal Logic K. While the model checking problems for LTL and to a lesser extent ATL have been very active research areas for the past decades, the model checking problem for the more basic Multi-agent Modal Logic K (MMLK) has important applications as a formal framework for perfect information multi-player games on its own. We present Minimal Proof Search (MPS), an effort number based algorithm solving the model checking problem for MMLK. We prove two important properties for MPS beyond its correctness. The (dis)proof exhibited by MPS is of minimal cost for a general definition of cost, and MPS is an optimal algorithm for finding (dis)proofs of minimal cost. Optimality means that any comparable algorithm either needs to explore a bigger or equal state space than MPS, or is not guaranteed to find a (dis)proof of minimal cost on every input. As such, our work relates to A* and AO* in heuristic search, to Proof Number Search and DFPN+ in two-player games, and to counterexample minimization in software model checking.Comment: Extended version of the JELIA 2012 paper with the same titl

Comparing BDD and SAT based techniques for model checking Chaum's Dining Cryptographers Protocol

We analyse different versions of the Dining Cryptographers protocol by means of automatic verification via model checking. Specifically we model the protocol in terms of a network of communicating automata and verify that the protocol meets the anonymity requirements specified. Two different model checking techniques (ordered binary decision diagrams and SAT-based bounded model checking) are evaluated and compared to verify the protocols

Reasoning about Knowledge and Strategies under Hierarchical Information

Two distinct semantics have been considered for knowledge in the context of strategic reasoning, depending on whether players know each other's strategy or not. The problem of distributed synthesis for epistemic temporal specifications is known to be undecidable for the latter semantics, already on systems with hierarchical information. However, for the other, uninformed semantics, the problem is decidable on such systems. In this work we generalise this result by introducing an epistemic extension of Strategy Logic with imperfect information. The semantics of knowledge operators is uninformed, and captures agents that can change observation power when they change strategies. We solve the model-checking problem on a class of "hierarchical instances", which provides a solution to a vast class of strategic problems with epistemic temporal specifications on hierarchical systems, such as distributed synthesis or rational synthesis

Bounded Model Checking for Linear Time Temporal-Epistemic Logic

We present a novel approach to the verification of multi-agent systems using bounded model checking for specifications in LTLK, a linear time temporal-epistemic logic. The method is based on binary decision diagrams rather than the standard conversion to Boolean satisfiability. We apply the approach to two classes of interpreted systems: the standard, synchronous semantics and the interleaved semantics. We provide a symbolic algorithm for the verification of LTLK over models of multi-agent systems and evaluate its implementation against MCK, a competing model checker for knowledge. Our evaluation indicates that the interleaved semantics can often be preferable in the verification of LTLK

Infinite games with finite knowledge gaps

Infinite games where several players seek to coordinate under imperfect information are deemed to be undecidable, unless the information is hierarchically ordered among the players. We identify a class of games for which joint winning strategies can be constructed effectively without restricting the direction of information flow. Instead, our condition requires that the players attain common knowledge about the actual state of the game over and over again along every play. We show that it is decidable whether a given game satisfies the condition, and prove tight complexity bounds for the strategy synthesis problem under $\omega$-regular winning conditions given by parity automata.Comment: 39 pages; 2nd revision; submitted to Information and Computatio