The need to extend business process languages with the capability to model complex data objects along with the control flow perspective has lead to significant practical and theoretical advances in the field of Business Process Modeling (BPM).On the practical side, there are several suites for control flow and data modeling; nonetheless, when it comes to formal verification, the data perspective is abstracted away due to the intrinsic difficulty of handling unbounded data. On the theoretical side, there is significant literature providing decidability results for expressive data-aware processes. However, they struggle to produce a concrete impact as being far from real BPM architectures and, most of all, not providing actual verification tools. In this paper we aim at bridging such a gap: we provide a concrete framework which, on the one hand, being based on Petri Nets and relational models, is close to the widely used BPM suites, and on the other is grounded on solid formal basis which allow to perform formal verification tasks. Moreover, we show how to encode our framework in an action language so as to perform reachability analysis using virtually any state-of-the-art planner.

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.

In this paper, we overview the recently introduced general framework of Description Logic Based Dynamic Systems, which leverages Levesque's functional approach to model systems that evolve the extensional part of a description logic knowledge base by means of actions. This framework is parametric w.r.t. the adopted description logic and the progression mechanism. In this setting, we discuss verification and adversarial synthesis for specifications expressed in a variant of first-order mu-calculus, with a controlled form of quantification across successive states, and present key decidability results under the natural assumption of state-boundedness.

Knowledge and Action Bases (KABs) have been put forward as a semantically rich representation of a domain, using a DL KB to account for its static aspects, and actions to evolve its extensional part over time, possibly introducing new objects. Recently, KABs have been extended to manage inconsistency, with ad-hoc verification techniques geared towards specific semantics. This work provides a twofold contribution along this line of research. On the one hand, we enrich KABs with a high-level, compact action language inspired by Golog, obtaining so called Golog-KABs (GKABs). On the other hand, we introduce a parametric execution semantics for GKABs, so as to elegantly accomodate a plethora of inconsistency-aware semantics based on the notion of repair. We then provide several reductions for the verification of sophisticated first-order temporal properties over inconsistency-aware GKABs, and show that it can be addressed using known techniques, developed for standard KABs.

We study the extension of relational multiagent systems (RMASs), where agents manipulate full-fledged relational databases, with data types and facets equipped with domain-specific, rigid relations (such as total orders). Specifically, we focus on design-time verification of RMASs against rich first-order temporal properties expressed in a variant of first-order mu-calculus with quantification across states. We build on previous decidability results under the state-bounded assumption, i.e., in each single state only a bounded number of data objects is stored in the agent databases, while unboundedly many can be encountered over time. We recast this condition, showing decidability in presence of dense, linear orders, and facets defined on top of them. Our approach is based on the construction of a finite-state, sound and complete abstraction of the original system, in which dense linear orders are reformulated as non-rigid relations working on the active domain of the system only. We also show undecidability when including a data type equipped with the successor relation.

Description logic Knowledge and Action Bases (KAB) are a mechanism for providing both a semantically rich representation of the information on the domain of interest in terms of a description logic knowledge base and actions to change such information over time, possibly introducing new objects. We resort to a variant of DL-Lite where the unique name assumption is not enforced and where equality between objects may be asserted and inferred. Actions are specified as sets of conditional effects, where conditions are based on epistemic queries over the knowledge base (TBox and ABox), and effects are expressed in terms of new ABoxes. In this setting, we address verification of temporal properties expressed in a variant of first-order mu-calculus with quantification across states. Notably, we show decidability of verification, under a suitable restriction inspired by the notion of weak acyclicity in data exchange.