The use of Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) in multi-agent planning has led to a widely adopted action formalism that can handle nondeterminism, partial observability and arbitrary knowledge nesting. As such expressive power comes at the cost of undecidability, several decidable fragments have been isolated, mainly based on syntactic restrictions of the action formalism. In this paper, we pursue a novel semantic approach to achieve decidability. Namely, rather than imposing syntactical constraints, the semantic approach focuses on the axioms of the logic for epistemic planning. Specifically, we augment the logic of knowledge S5$_n$ and with an interaction axiom called (knowledge) commutativity, which controls the ability of agents to unboundedly reason on the knowledge of other agents. We then provide a threefold contribution. First, we show that the resulting epistemic planning problem is decidable. In doing so, we prove that our framework admits a finitary non-fixpoint characterization of common knowledge, which is of independent interest. Second, we study different generalizations of the commutativity axiom, with the goal of obtaining decidability for more expressive fragments of DEL. Finally, we show that two well-known epistemic planning systems based on action templates, when interpreted under the setting of knowledge, conform to the commutativity axiom, hence proving their decidability.

In the absence of prescribed coordination, it is often necessary for individual agents to synthesize their own plans, taking into account not only their own capabilities and beliefs about the world but also their beliefs about other agents, including what each of the agents will come to believe as the consequence of the actions of others. To illustrate, consider the scenario where Larry and Moe meet on a regular basis at the local diner to swap the latest gossip. Larry has come to know that Nancy (Larry's daughter) has just received a major promotion in her job, but unbeknownst to him, Moe has already learned this bit of information through the grapevine. Before they speak, both believe Nancy is getting a promotion, Larry believes Moe is unaware of this (and consequently wishes to share the news), and Moe assumes Larry must already be aware of the promotion but is unaware of Moe's own knowledge of the situation. Very quickly we can see how the nesting of (potentially incorrect) belief can be a complicated and interesting setting to model. In this paper, we examine the problem of synthesizing plans in such settings. In particular, given a finite set of agents, each with: (1) (possibly incomplete and incorrect) beliefs about the world and about the beliefs of other agents; and (2) differing capabilities including the ability to perform actions whose outcomes are unknown to other agents; we are interested in synthesizing a plan to achieve a goal condition. Planning is at the belief level and as such, while we consider the execution of actions that can change the state of the world (ontic actions) as well as an agent's state of knowledge or belief (epistemic or more accurately doxastic actions, including communication actions), all outcomes are with respect to belief.

Conformance checking is a key process mining task for comparing the expected behavior captured in a process model and the actual behavior recorded in a log. While this problem has been extensively studied for pure control-flow processes, conformance checking with multi-perspective processes is still at its infancy. In this paper, we attack this challenging problem by considering processes that combine the data and control-flow dimensions. In particular, we adopt data Petri nets (DPNs) as the underlying reference formalism, and show how solid, well-established automated reasoning techniques can be effectively employed for computing conformance metrics and data-aware alignments. We do so by introducing the CoCoMoT (Computing Conformance Modulo Theories) framework, with a fourfold contribution. First, we show how SAT-based encodings studied in the pure control-flow setting can be lifted to our data-aware case, using SMT as the underlying formal and algorithmic framework. Second, we introduce a novel preprocessing technique based on a notion of property-preserving clustering, to speed up the computation of conformance checking outputs. Third, we provide a proof-of-concept implementation that uses a state-of-the-art SMT solver and report on preliminary experiments. Finally, we discuss how CoCoMoT directly lends itself to a number of further tasks, like multi- and anti-alignments, log analysis by clustering, and model repair.

In this paper we study the verification of parameterised multi-agent systems (MASs), and in particular the task of verifying whether unwanted states, characterised as a given state formula, are reachable in a given MAS, i.e., whether the MAS is unsafe. The MAS is parameterised and the model only describes the finite set of possible agent templates, while the actual number of concrete agent instances for each template is unbounded and cannot be foreseen. This makes the state-space infinite. As safety may of course depend on the number of agent instances in the system, the verification result must be correct irrespective of such number. We solve this problem via infinite-state model checking based on satisfiability modulo theories (SMT), relying on the theory of array-based systems: we present parameterised MASs as particular array-based systems, under two execution semantics for the MAS, which we call concurrent and interleaved. We prove our decidability results under these assumptions and illustrate our implementation approach, called SAFE: the Swarm Safety Detector, based on the third-party model checker MCMT, which we evaluate experimentally. Finally, we discuss how this approach lends itself to richer parameterised and data-aware MAS settings beyond the state-of-the-art solutions in the literature, which we leave as future work.

Manufacturing is transitioning from a mass production model to a manufacturing as a service model in which manufacturing facilities 'bid' to produce products. To decide whether to bid for a complex, previously unseen product, a manufacturing facility must be able to synthesize, 'on the fly', a process plan controller that delegates abstract manufacturing tasks in the supplied process recipe to the appropriate manufacturing resources, e.g., CNC machines, robots etc. Previous work in applying AI behaviour composition to synthesize process plan controllers has considered only finite state ad-hoc representations. Here, we study the problem in the relational setting of the Situation Calculus. By taking advantage of recent work on abstraction in the Situation Calculus, process recipes and available resources are represented by ConGolog programs over, respectively, an abstract and a concrete action theory. This allows us to capture the problem in a formal, general framework, and show decidability for the case of bounded action theories. We also provide techniques for actually synthesizing the controller.

In this paper, we model manufacturing processes and facilities as transducers (automata with output). The problem of whether a given manufacturing process can be realized by a given set of manufacturing resources can then be stated as an orchestration problem for transducers. We first consider the conceptually simpler case of uni-transducers (transducers with a single input and a single output port), and show that synthesizing orchestrations for uni-transducers is EXPTIME-complete. Surprisingly, the complexity remains the same for the more expressive multi-transducer case, where transducers have multiple input and output ports and the orchestration is in charge of dynamically connecting ports during execution.

Proper epistemic knowledge bases (PEKBs) are syntactic knowledge bases that use multi-agent epistemic logic to represent nested multi-agent knowledge and belief. PEKBs have certain syntactic restrictions that lead to desirable computational properties; primarily, a PEKB is a conjunction of modal literals, and therefore contains no disjunction. Sound entailment can be checked in polynomial time, and is complete for a large set of arbitrary formulae in logics K n and KD n . In this paper, we extend PEKBs to deal with a restricted form of disjunction: 'knowing whether.' An agent i knows whether Q iff agent i knows Q or knows not Q; that is, []Q or []not(Q). In our experience, the ability to represent that an agent knows whether something holds is useful in many multi-agent domains. We represent knowing whether with a modal operator, and present sound polynomial-time entailment algorithms on PEKBs with the knowing whether operator in K n and KD n , but which are complete for a smaller class of queries than standard PEKBs.

Many AI applications involve the interaction of multiple autonomous agents, requiring those agents to reason about their own beliefs, as well as those of other agents. However, planning involving nested beliefs is known to be computationally challenging. In this work, we address the task of synthesizing plans that necessitate reasoning about the beliefs of other agents. We plan from the perspective of a single agent with the potential for goals and actions that involve nested beliefs, non-homogeneous agents, co-present observations, and the ability for one agent to reason as if it were another. We formally characterize our notion of planning with nested belief, and subsequently demonstrate how to automatically convert such problems into problems that appeal to classical planning technology. Our approach represents an important first step towards applying the well-established field of automated planning to the challenging task of planning involving nested beliefs of multiple agents.

Empirical studies with humans and agents demonstrate that the nature and forms of information required by the human differ depending on the design of the relationship between the participants — a relationship that is sometimes characterised using the concept of levels of autonomy, though the usefulness of that characterisation has recently been questioned. Therefore, understanding how people work with automation and how to design automated systems to better support people, is a field long studied, but of growing importance. Our current work seeks to contribute to the design of representations and algorithms that can be deployed in such contexts.

In this paper, we review a series of agent behavior synthesis problems under full observability and nondeterminism (partial controllability), ranging from conditional planning, to recently introduced agent planning programs, and to sophisticated forms of agent behavior compositions, and show that all of them can be solved by model checking two-player game structures. These structures are akin to transition systems/Kripke structures, usually adopted in model checking, except that they distinguish (and hence allow to separately quantify) between the actions/moves of two antagonistic players. We show that using them we can implement solvers for several agent behavior synthesis problems.