On Ability to Autonomously Execute Agent Programs with Sensing
|
|
- Lionel Anthony
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 On Ability to Autonomously Execute Agent Programs with Sensing Sebastian Sardiña Dept. of Computer Science University of Toronto Yves Lespérance Dept. of Computer Science York University Giuseppe De Giacomo Dip. Informatica e Sistemistica Univer. di Roma La Sapienza degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it Hector J. Levesque Dept. of Computer Science University of Toronto hector@cs.toronto.edu cogrobo
2 Motivation Agent programming languages should support planning/deliberation under incomplete information with sensing actions. Need a spec. for this. Most existing formal models of deliberation are epistemic, while agent programming languages have transition system semantics. Hard to relate. Here, develop new non-epistemic formal model of deliberation. Set within situation calculus and IndiGolog. But important lessons for agent programming languages in general. 1
3 Situation Calculus A dialect of the predicate calculus with sorts for actions and situations Actions: open, look, dial(14), go(airport), check departures,... Situations: S 0 the initial situation do(a, s) where a is an action term and s is a situation Fluents: predicates/functions whose value changes from situation to situation: Locked(S 0 ) Locked(do(dial(2), S 0 )) Use a distinguished predicate P oss(a, s) to assert that it is possible to execute action a in situation s 2
4 High-Level Deterministic Programs a, primitive action δ 1 ; δ 2, sequence if φ then δ 1 else δ 2 endif, conditional while φ do δ endwhile, while loop 3
5 High-Level Deterministic Programs a, primitive action δ 1 ; δ 2, sequence if φ then δ 1 else δ 2 endif, conditional while φ do δ endwhile, while loop GetOnF light Detailed def = go(airport); check departures; % sensing action if P arked(f light123, GateA) then go(gatea); board plane(f light123) else go(gateb); board plane(f light123) endif Without sensing, goal cannot be achieved! 3
6 High-Level Programs and Histories A history σ = (a 1, µ 1 ), (a 2, µ 2 ),..., (a n, µ n ) describes a run with actions and their sensing results; e.g.: (go(airport), 1) (check departures, 0) (go(gateb), 1). A configuration is a pair (δ, σ) with a program δ and a history σ specifying the actions performed so far and the sensing results obtained. 4
7 High-Level Programs and Histories A history σ = (a 1, µ 1 ), (a 2, µ 2 ),..., (a n, µ n ) describes a run with actions and their sensing results; e.g.: (go(airport), 1) (check departures, 0) (go(gateb), 1). A configuration is a pair (δ, σ) with a program δ and a history σ specifying the actions performed so far and the sensing results obtained. Sensed[σ] stands for formula specifying the sensing results of history σ, e.g.: SF (go(airport), S 0 ) SF (check departures, do(go(airport), S 0 )) SF (go(gateb), do(check departures, do(go(airport), S 0 ))) end[σ] stands for the situation term of history, σ, e.g.: end[ɛ] = S 0 and end[(go(airport), 1)] = do(go(airport), S 0 ) 4
8 IndiGolog Semantics for Online Executions Two relations in the object language: T rans(δ, s, δ, s ): means that it can make transition (δ, s) (δ, s ) by executing a single primitive action or test. F inal(δ, s): means that computation can be terminated in (δ, s) 5
9 IndiGolog Semantics for Online Executions Two relations in the object language: T rans(δ, s, δ, s ): means that it can make transition (δ, s) (δ, s ) by executing a single primitive action or test. F inal(δ, s): means that computation can be terminated in (δ, s) Semantics based on two notions (relative to an underlying theory of action D): Configuration (δ, σ) may evolve to (δ, σ ) w.r.t. a model M. A configuration (δ, σ) is final, i.e. may legally terminate. 5
10 IndiGolog Semantics for Online Executions Two relations in the object language: T rans(δ, s, δ, s ): means that it can make transition (δ, s) (δ, s ) by executing a single primitive action or test. F inal(δ, s): means that computation can be terminated in (δ, s) Semantics based on two notions (relative to an underlying theory of action D): Configuration (δ, σ) may evolve to (δ, σ ) w.r.t. a model M. A configuration (δ, σ) is final, i.e. may legally terminate. The theory D, augmented with the sensing results in σ, must entail that the transition is possible. Model M above represents a possible environment (generate sensing results.) 5
11 IndiGolog Semantics for Online Executions Formal Details Configuration (δ, σ) may evolve to (δ, σ ) w.r.t. a model M (relative to an underlying theory of action D) iff (i) M is a model of D {Sensed[σ]}, and (ii) D T {Sensed[σ]} = T rans(δ, s, δ, s ), and (iii) σ = σ (a, 1) if s = do(a, s) and M = SF (a, s), σ (a, 0) if s = do(a, s) and M = SF (a, s), σ if s = s, where s = end[σ] and s = end[σ ]. Configuration (δ, σ) is final when: D T {Sensed[σ]} = F inal(δ, end[σ]) 6
12 Deliberation: An EC-based Account The idea: An agent can/knows how to execute program δ in history σ iff he can always choose a next action/transition and eventually reach a terminating configuration no matter what sensing results are obtained. Agent must know that the chosen action/transition is allowed by the program and is executable. In what follows, we we will define KHow EC (δ, σ) using both entailment and consistency. 7
13 Deliberation: An EC-based Account (cont.) We define KHow EC (δ, σ) to be the smallest relation R(δ, σ) such that: 8
14 Deliberation: An EC-based Account (cont.) We define KHow EC (δ, σ) to be the smallest relation R(δ, σ) such that: (E1) if (δ, σ) is final, then R(δ, σ); 8
15 Deliberation: An EC-based Account (cont.) We define KHow EC (δ, σ) to be the smallest relation R(δ, σ) such that: (E1) if (δ, σ) is final, then R(δ, σ); (E2) if (δ, σ) may evolve to configurations (δ, σ (a, µ i )) w.r.t. some models M i with i = 1..k for some k 1, and R(δ, σ (a, µ i )) holds for all i = 1..k, then R(δ, σ). Obs.: always consider the underlying theory plus the observations in history σ. 8
16 E.g. Tree Chopping Problem Agent wants to cut down a tree. Possible actions are: chop, take one chop at the tree, and look, which tells the agent whether the tree has fallen (i.e., senses fluent Down). It is known that tree will eventually fall, but number of chops needed is not bounded. 9
17 E.g. Tree Chopping Problem Agent wants to cut down a tree. Possible actions are: chop, take one chop at the tree, and look, which tells the agent whether the tree has fallen (i.e., senses fluent Down). It is known that tree will eventually fall, but number of chops needed is not bounded. Intuitively, the following program δ tc : solves the problem. But... while Down do chop; look endwhile 9
18 Formalizing the Tree Chopping E.g.: D tc D ss contains the following successor state axiom: RemainingChops(do(a, s)) = n a = chop RemainingChops(s) = n + 1 a chop RemainingChops(s) = n. D ap contains the following 2 precondition axioms: P oss(chop, s) (RemainingChops(s) > 0), P oss(look, s) T rue. D sf contains the following sensing axiom: SF (look, s) (RemainingChops(s) = 0). D S0 = {RemainingChops(S 0 ) > 0} (initial situation). Down(s) def = (RemainingChops(s) = 0). 10
19 Tree Chopping E.g. (cont.) Intuitively, the following program δ tc : while Down do chop; look endwhile solves the problem. But... 11
20 Tree Chopping E.g. (cont.) Intuitively, the following program δ tc : while Down do chop; look endwhile solves the problem. But... Theorem 1. For all k N, KHow EC (δ tc, [(chop, 1) (look, 0)] k ) does not hold. In particular, when k = 0, KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ) does not hold. In fact,... 11
21 Tree Chopping E.g. (cont.) Intuitively, the following program δ tc : while Down do chop; look endwhile solves the problem. But... Theorem 1. For all k N, KHow EC (δ tc, [(chop, 1) (look, 0)] k ) does not hold. In particular, when k = 0, KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ) does not hold. In fact,... Theorem 2. Whenever KHow EC (δ, σ) holds, there is simple kind of conditional plan, a TREE program, that can be followed to execute δ in σ. which means that... 11
22 Tree Chopping E.g. (cont.) Intuitively, the following program δ tc : while Down do chop; look endwhile solves the problem. But... Theorem 1. For all k N, KHow EC (δ tc, [(chop, 1) (look, 0)] k ) does not hold. In particular, when k = 0, KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ) does not hold. In fact,... Theorem 2. Whenever KHow EC (δ, σ) holds, there is simple kind of conditional plan, a TREE program, that can be followed to execute δ in σ. which means that... Corollary 1. KHow EC is only correct when problem has a bounded solution 11
23 Why does KHow EC Fail? ents δ tc [ ] chop δ tc look ; δ tc 0 look ; δ tc 0 (chop, 1) (chop, 1) (chop, 1) (chop, 1) (look, 0) chop (look, 0) look (look, 0) chop look (look, 0) (chop, 1) (chop, 1) (chop, 1) (look, 0) 0 (look, 0) look ; δ tc 1 (chop, 1) 1 look (chop, 1) 1 δ tc (chop, 1) (look, 1) δ tc (chop, 1) (look, 0) (chop, 1) (look, 1) δ tc δ tc def = while Down do chop; look endwhile δ tc (chop, 1) (look, 0) (chop, 1) (look, 0) (chop, 1) (look, 1) 12
24 Why does KHow EC Fail? If KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ), then for all j N: KHow EC (δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j ) and KHow EC (look; δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j (chop, 1)). δ tc chop look; δ tc KHow EC is taking into account the execution where three never comes down! Every finite prefix of the execution is consistent with D tc. But, the set of all of them together is not! 13
25 Why does KHow EC Fail? If KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ), then for all j N: δ tc chop look; δ tc δ tc KHow EC (δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j ) and KHow EC (look; δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j (chop, 1)). KHow EC is taking into account the execution where three never comes down! look, 0 look, 1 Every finite prefix of the execution is consistent with D tc. But, the set of all of them together is not! 13
26 Why does KHow EC Fail? If KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ), then for all j N: δ tc chop look; δ tc δ tc look, 0 look, 1 KHow EC (δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j ) and KHow EC (look; δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j (chop, 1)). KHow EC is taking into account the execution where three never comes down! δ tc chop Every finite prefix of the execution is consistent with D tc. But, the set of all of them together is not! 13
27 Why does KHow EC Fail? δ tc chop look; δ tc δ tc look, 0 look, 1 δ tc chop look; δ tc δ tc look, 0 look, 1 If KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ), then for all j N: KHow EC (δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j ) and KHow EC (look; δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j (chop, 1)). KHow EC is taking into account the execution where three never comes down! Every finite prefix of the execution is consistent with D tc. But, the set of all of them together is not!... 13
28 Why does KHow EC Fail? δ tc chop look; δ tc δ tc look, 0 look, 1 δ tc chop look; δ tc δ tc look, 0 look, 1 If KHow EC (δ tc, ɛ), then for all j N: KHow EC (δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j ) and KHow EC (look; δ tc, ((chop, 1) (look, 0)) j (chop, 1)). KHow EC is taking into account the execution where three never comes down! Every finite prefix of the execution is consistent with D tc. But, the set of all of them together is not!... 13
29 Deliberation: ET-based Account To solve the problem, we consider each environment/model individually. We define KHowInM(δ, σ, M) to be the smallest relation R(δ, σ) such that: 14
30 Deliberation: ET-based Account To solve the problem, we consider each environment/model individually. We define KHowInM(δ, σ, M) to be the smallest relation R(δ, σ) such that: (T1) if (δ, σ) is final, then R(δ, σ); 14
31 Deliberation: ET-based Account To solve the problem, we consider each environment/model individually. We define KHowInM(δ, σ, M) to be the smallest relation R(δ, σ) such that: (T1) if (δ, σ) is final, then R(δ, σ); (T2) if (δ, σ) may evolve to (δ, σ (a, µ)) w.r.t. M and R(δ, σ (a, µ)), then R(δ, σ). Uses truth in a model! 14
32 Deliberation: ET-based Account (cont.) KHow ET (δ, σ): iff it knows how to execute it in every model of the history (i.e., in every possible environment). Formally: KHow ET (δ, σ) iff for every model M such that M = D {Sensed[σ]}, KHowInM(δ, σ, M) holds. 15
33 Deliberation: ET-based Account (cont.) KHow ET (δ, σ): iff it knows how to execute it in every model of the history (i.e., in every possible environment). Formally: KHow ET (δ, σ) iff for every model M such that M = D {Sensed[σ]}, KHowInM(δ, σ, M) holds. KHow ET handles the tree chopping example: KHow ET (δ tc, ɛ) holds! 15
34 Generalizing to Non-deterministic Programs Two possible approaches: Angelic: choices are under the control of the agent (deliberation); Demoniac: choices are not under the control of the agent (execution). KHow Ang ET nd (δ, σ) iff there is a deterministic program δ d such that KHow ET (δ d, σ) holds, and D T {Sensed[σ]} = s.do(δ d, end[σ], s) Do(δ, end[σ], s). 16
35 Further Issues KHow X can be used to define agent ability Can X (φ, σ). Angelic version for nondeterministic programs can be used to define a metatheoretic account of deliberation (i.e., search construct in IndiGolog). Relation KHow ET corresponds exactly to effective controllers and robot programs as described in [Lin and Levesque 1998]. Hence, it is both sound and complete w.r.t. robot achievability. 17
36 Lessons for Agent Programming Languages Most agent programming languages have transition semantics and use entailment to evaluate tests and action preconditions (e.g., ConGolog, 3APL, FLUX, etc.). Most agent programming languages only do on-line reactive execution; no deliberation/lookahead. Deliberation is only a different control regime involving search over the agent program s transition tree. With sensing, need to find more than just a path to a final configuration, need a plan/subtree with branches for all possible sensing results. Can determine possible sensing results by checking consistency with KB. Essentially an EC-based approach. 18
37 Lessons for Agent Programming Languages (cont.) As methods for implementing deliberation in restricted cases, approaches are fine. EC-based But as a semantics or specification, we claim they are wrong. 19
38 Lessons for Agent Programming Languages (cont.) As methods for implementing deliberation in restricted cases, approaches are fine. EC-based But as a semantics or specification, we claim they are wrong. KHow EC gives the wrong results on problems that can t be solved in a bounded number of actions. What s required is something like our ET-based account. 19
39 Summary Agent programming languages should support planning/deliberation under incomplete information with sensing actions. We develop some non-epistemic formal models of deliberation. The obvious model is one where agent makes decisions about what to do in terms of what is entailed by or consistent with his KB. This model doesn t work properly for problems that have no bounded solution and require iteration. We propose an alternative entailment and truth-based model that works. There are important lessons for agent programming languages in general. 20
40 Further Research Relate this metatheoretic account of deliberation to epistemic ones. Re-state everything in terms of other agent formalisms: 3APL, AgentSpeak, FLUX, etc. Implementation of search/planning with non-binary sensing actions. More general accounts of sensing and knowledge change. Multiagent planning. Etc. 21
41 Related Work [Moore 1985]: knowledge and plans. [Davis 1994]: Knowledge precondition for plans (executable plans). [Davis & Morgenstern 2004]: A First-Order Theory of Communication and Multi-Agent Plans. [Mc Illraith & Son 2002]: self-sufficient programs. Lin & Levesque 1998]: robot programs and effective controllers. 22
On the Semantics of Deliberation in IndiGolog
On the Semantics of Deliberation in IndiGolog From Theory to Implementation GIUSEPPE DE GIACOMO (degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it) Dip. Informatica e Sistemistica, Università di Roma La Sapienza, Via Salaria
More informationOn the semantics of deliberation in IndiGolog from theory to implementation
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 41: 259 299, 2004. 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. On the semantics of deliberation in IndiGolog from theory to implementation
More informationReconciling Situation Calculus and Fluent Calculus
Reconciling Situation Calculus and Fluent Calculus Stephan Schiffel and Michael Thielscher Department of Computer Science Dresden University of Technology {stephan.schiffel,mit}@inf.tu-dresden.de Abstract
More informationTractable Reasoning with Incomplete First-Order Knowledge in Dynamic Systems with Context-Dependent Actions
Tractable Reasoning with Incomplete First-Order Knowledge in Dynamic Systems with Context-Dependent Actions Yongmei Liu and Hector J. Levesque Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto,
More informationDIS La Sapienza PhD Course. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. Lecture 4: High-Level Programming in the Situation Calculus: Golog and ConGolog
DIS La Sapienza PhD Course Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems Lecture 4: High-Level Programming in the Situation Calculus: Golog and ConGolog Yves Lespérance Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering
More informationOnline Agent Supervision in the Situation Calculus
Online Agent Supervision in the Situation Calculus Bita Banihashemi York University Toronto, ON, Canada bita@cse.yorku.ca Giuseppe De Giacomo Sapienza Università di Roma Roma, Italy degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it
More informationLecture 3: High-level Programming in the Situation Calculus: Golog and ConGolog
DIS La Sapienza, PhD Course: Reasoning about Action and High-Level Programs Lecture 3: High-level Programming in the Situation Calculus: Golog and ConGolog Yves Lespérance Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering,
More informationOn the Limits of Planning over Belief States under Strict Uncertainty
On the Limits of Planning over Belief States under Strict Uncertainty Sebastian Sardina Dept. of Comp. Sci. RMIT University Melbourne, AUSTRLIA ssardina@cs.rmit.edu.au Giuseppe De Giacomo Dipart. di Infor.
More informationInterpreting Golog Programs in Flux
Interpreting Golog Programs in Flux Stephan Schiffel and Michael Thielscher Department of Computer Science Dresden University of Technology {stephan.schiffel,mit}@inf.tu-dresden.de Abstract A new semantics
More informationOn the Progression of Situation Calculus Basic Action Theories: Resolving a 10-year-old Conjecture
On the Progression of Situation Calculus Basic Action Theories: Resolving a 10-year-old Conjecture Stavros Vassos and Hector J Levesque Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto, ON,
More informationAbstraction of Agents Executing Online and their Abilities in the Situation Calculus
Abstraction of Agents Executing Online and their Abilities in the Situation Calculus Bita Banihashemi 1, Giuseppe De Giacomo 2, Yves Lespérance 1 1 York University 2 Sapienza Università di Roma bita@cse.yorku.ca,
More informationThe Situation Calculus and Golog
and A Tutorial Gerhard Lakemeyer Dept. of Computer Science RWTH Aachen University Germany 2nd Hybris Workshop, Freiburg, May 27 28, 2013 Outline 1 2 3 May 28, 2013 2 / 34 Knowledge-Based Agents Example:
More informationProjection using Regression and Sensors
Projection using Regression and Sensors Giuseppe De Giacomo Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica Università di Roma La Sapienza Via Salaria 11, 00198 Roma, Italy degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it Hector
More informationLocal Conditional High-Level Robot Programs (extended version)
Local Conditional High-Level Robot Programs (extended version) Sebastian Sardiña Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 ssardina@cs.toronto.edu, WWW home page: http://www.cs.toronto.edu
More informationProgression of Situation Calculus Action Theories with Incomplete Information
Progression of Situation Calculus Action Theories with Incomplete Information Stavros Vassos and Hector Levesque Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto, ON, CANADA {stavros,hector}@cs.toronto.edu
More informationDescription Logics. Deduction in Propositional Logic. franconi. Enrico Franconi
(1/20) Description Logics Deduction in Propositional Logic Enrico Franconi franconi@cs.man.ac.uk http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/ franconi Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester (2/20) Decision
More informationComposition of ConGolog Programs
Composition of ConGolog Programs Sebastian Sardina 1 Giuseppe De Giacomo 2 1 Department of Computer Science and Information Technology RMIT University, Melbourne, AUSTRALIA 2 Dipartimento di Informatica
More informationinitial state to some prespecied goal state, the task is to nd a sequence of actions that constitutes a legal execution of some prespecied non-determi
ConGolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus: foundations Giuseppe De Giacomo Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica Universita di Roma \La Sapienza" Via Salaria 113,
More informationOnline agent supervision in the situation calculus - Extended version
Online agent supervision in the situation calculus - Extended version Bita Banihashemi, Giuseppe De Giacomo, and Yves Lespérance Technical Report EECS-2016-02 July 12 2016 Department of Electrical Engineering
More informationConGolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus
Artificial Intelligence 121 (2000) 109 169 ConGolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus Giuseppe De Giacomo a,, Yves Lespérance b, Hector J. Levesque c a Dipartimento di
More informationOn the Progression of Knowledge in the Situation Calculus
On the Progression of Knowledge in the Situation Calculus Yongmei Liu Department of Computer Science Sun Yat-sen University Guangzhou, China Joint work with Ximing Wen KRW-2012, Guiyang June 17, 2012 Y.
More informationDesigning and Evaluating Generic Ontologies
Designing and Evaluating Generic Ontologies Michael Grüninger Department of Industrial Engineering University of Toronto gruninger@ie.utoronto.ca August 28, 2007 1 Introduction One of the many uses of
More informationContinuing the KRR Journey
1 Weeks 1 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Continuing the KRR Journey Propositional and first-order logic (FOL) Expressiveness and Decidability: Propositional logic is decidable, FOL is not. Classical planning problems:
More informationIterated Belief Change in the Situation Calculus
Iterated Belief Change in the Situation Calculus Steven Shapiro a,, Maurice Pagnucco b, Yves Lespérance c, Hector J. Levesque a a Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S
More informationA Logical Theory of Coordination and Joint Ability
A Logical Theory of Coordination and Joint Ability Hojjat Ghaderi and Hector Levesque Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada {hojjat,hector}@cstorontoedu Yves
More informationNon-Markovian Control in the Situation Calculus
Non-Markovian Control in the Situation Calculus An Elaboration Niklas Hoppe Seminar Foundations Of Artificial Intelligence Knowledge-Based Systems Group RWTH Aachen May 3, 2009 1 Contents 1 Introduction
More informationReasoning about Noisy Sensors and Effectors in the Situation Calculus
Reasoning about Noisy Sensors and Effectors in the Situation Calculus arxiv:cs/9809013v1 [cs.ai] 9 Sep 1998 Fahiem Bacchus Dept. Computer Science University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario Canada, N2L 3G1
More informationDescription Logics. Foundations of Propositional Logic. franconi. Enrico Franconi
(1/27) Description Logics Foundations of Propositional Logic Enrico Franconi franconi@cs.man.ac.uk http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/ franconi Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester (2/27) Knowledge
More information14. Actions. KR & R Brachman & Levesque Situation calculus
14. Actions KR & R Brachman & Levesque 2005 236 Situation calculus The situation calculus is a dialect of FOL for representing dynamically changing worlds in which all changes are the result of named actions.
More informationExpressing Transactions with Savepoints as Non-Markovian Theories of Actions
Expressing Transactions with Savepoints as Non-Markovian Theories of Actions Iluju Kiringa School of Info. Technology and Eng. University of Ottawa Alfredo Gabaldon Department of Computer Science University
More informationOn the Role of Possibility in Action Execution and Knowledge in the Situation Calculus
On the Role of Possibility in Action Execution and Knowledge in the Situation Calculus Vahid Vaezian (B) and James P. Delgrande School of Computing Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6,
More informationReasoning about State Constraints in the Situation Calculus
Reasoning about State Constraints in the Situation Calculus Joint work with Naiqi Li and Yi Fan Yongmei Liu Dept. of Computer Science Sun Yat-sen University Guangzhou, China Presented at IRIT June 26,
More informationProgression and Verification of Situation Calculus Agents with Bounded Beliefs
Progression and Verification of Situation Calculus Agents with Bounded Beliefs Giuseppe De Giacomo DIAG, Sapienza Università di Roma Roma, Italy degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it Yves Lespérance EECS York University
More informationLogic: Propositional Logic Truth Tables
Logic: Propositional Logic Truth Tables Raffaella Bernardi bernardi@inf.unibz.it P.zza Domenicani 3, Room 2.28 Faculty of Computer Science, Free University of Bolzano-Bozen http://www.inf.unibz.it/~bernardi/courses/logic06
More informationAn Argumentation-Based Interpreter for Golog Programs
An Argumentation-Based Interpreter for Golog Programs Michelle L. Blom and Adrian R. Pearce NICTA Victoria Research Laboratory Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering The University of
More informationdemanding computationally in all but simple settings. An alternative approach that is showing promise is that of high-level program execution [20]. Th
ConGolog, a concurrent programming language based on the situation calculus Giuseppe De Giacomo Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica Universita di Roma \La Sapienza" Via Salaria 113, 00198 Roma,
More informationMULTI-AGENT ONLY-KNOWING
MULTI-AGENT ONLY-KNOWING Gerhard Lakemeyer Computer Science, RWTH Aachen University Germany AI, Logic, and Epistemic Planning, Copenhagen October 3, 2013 Joint work with Vaishak Belle Contents of this
More informationCS558 Programming Languages
CS558 Programming Languages Winter 2017 Lecture 2b Andrew Tolmach Portland State University 1994-2017 Semantics Informal vs. Formal Informal semantics Descriptions in English (or other natural language)
More informationPrice: $25 (incl. T-Shirt, morning tea and lunch) Visit:
Three days of interesting talks & workshops from industry experts across Australia Explore new computing topics Network with students & employers in Brisbane Price: $25 (incl. T-Shirt, morning tea and
More informationProofs of Correctness: Introduction to Axiomatic Verification
Proofs of Correctness: Introduction to Axiomatic Verification Introduction Weak correctness predicate Assignment statements Sequencing Selection statements Iteration 1 Introduction What is Axiomatic Verification?
More informationOn the Decidability of Verifying LTL Properties of GOLOG Programs
On the Decidability of Verifying LTL Properties of GOLOG Programs Benjamin Zarrieß Theoretical Computer Science TU Dresden, Germany zarriess@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de Jens Claßen Knowledge-Based Systems Group
More informationSituation Calculus. Gerald Steinbauer. Institute for Software Technology. Gerald Steinbauer. Situation Calculus - Introduction
Situation Calculus Institute for Software Technology 1 Dates Organizational Issues 10.11.2016 8:45-11:00 (HS i12) lecture and first assignment 17.11.2016 8:45-11:00 (HS i12) lecture and programming assignment
More informationProgramming Languages and Compilers (CS 421)
Programming Languages and Compilers (CS 421) Sasa Misailovic 4110 SC, UIUC https://courses.engr.illinois.edu/cs421/fa2017/cs421a Based in part on slides by Mattox Beckman, as updated by Vikram Adve, Gul
More informationReasoning by Regression: Pre- and Postdiction Procedures for Logics of Action and Change with Nondeterminism*
Reasoning by Regression: Pre- and Postdiction Procedures for Logics of Action and Change with Nondeterminism* Marcus Bjareland and Lars Karlsson Department of Computer and Information Science Linkopings
More informationAdding Modal Operators to the Action Language A
Adding Modal Operators to the Action Language A Aaron Hunter Simon Fraser University Burnaby, B.C. Canada V5A 1S6 amhunter@cs.sfu.ca Abstract The action language A is a simple high-level language for describing
More informationDesign of Distributed Systems Melinda Tóth, Zoltán Horváth
Design of Distributed Systems Melinda Tóth, Zoltán Horváth Design of Distributed Systems Melinda Tóth, Zoltán Horváth Publication date 2014 Copyright 2014 Melinda Tóth, Zoltán Horváth Supported by TÁMOP-412A/1-11/1-2011-0052
More informationPropositional Calculus - Hilbert system H Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST
Propositional Calculus - Hilbert system H Moonzoo Kim CS Division of EECS Dept. KAIST moonzoo@cs.kaist.ac.kr http://pswlab.kaist.ac.kr/courses/cs402-07 1 Review Goal of logic To check whether given a formula
More informationBounded Epistemic Situation Calculus Theories
Bounded Epistemic Situation Calculus Theories Giuseppe De Giacomo DIAG Sapienza Università di Roma Roma, Italy degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it Yves Lespérance Dept. of Computer Sci. & Eng. York University Toronto,
More informationA Generic Framework and Solver for Synthesizing Finite-State Controllers
A Generic Framework and Solver for Synthesizing Finite-State Controllers Yuxiao Hu Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto, ON M5S3G4, Canada yuxiao@cs.toronto.edu Giuseppe De Giacomo
More informationSituation Calculus and Golog
Situation Calculus and Golog Institute for Software Technology 1 Recap Situation Calculus Situation Calculus allows for reasoning about change and actions a dialect of the second-order logic uses the concept
More informationOn First-Order Definability and Computability of Progression for Local-Effect Actions and Beyond
On First-Order Definability and Computability of Progression for Local-Effect Actions and Beyond Yongmei Liu Dept. of Computer Science Sun Yat-sen University Guangzhou 510275, China ymliu@mail.sysu.edu.cn
More informationLTCS Report. On the Decidability of Verifying LTL Properties of Golog Programs (Extended Version) LTCS-Report 13-10
Technische Universität Dresden Institute for Theoretical Computer Science Chair for Automata Theory LTCS Report On the Decidability of Verifying LTL Properties of Golog Programs (Extended Version) Benjamin
More informationcis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006
cis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006 today s topics: propositional logic cis32-spring2006-sklar-lec18 1 Introduction Weak (search-based) problem-solving does not scale to real problems. To succeed, problem
More informationApplications of the Situation Calculus To Formalizing. Control and Strategic Information: The Prolog Cut Operator. Fangzhen Lin
Applications of the Situation Calculus To Formalizing Control and Strategic Information: The Prolog Cut Operator Fangzhen Lin (in@csusthk) Department of Computer Science The Hong Kong University of Science
More informationAxiomatic Semantics. Lecture 9 CS 565 2/12/08
Axiomatic Semantics Lecture 9 CS 565 2/12/08 Axiomatic Semantics Operational semantics describes the meaning of programs in terms of the execution steps taken by an abstract machine Denotational semantics
More informationDynamic Semantics. Dynamic Semantics. Operational Semantics Axiomatic Semantics Denotational Semantic. Operational Semantics
Dynamic Semantics Operational Semantics Denotational Semantic Dynamic Semantics Operational Semantics Operational Semantics Describe meaning by executing program on machine Machine can be actual or simulated
More informationHoare Logic: Part II
Hoare Logic: Part II COMP2600 Formal Methods for Software Engineering Jinbo Huang Australian National University COMP 2600 Hoare Logic II 1 Factorial {n 0} fact := 1; i := n; while (i >0) do fact := fact
More informationTowards the Integration of Programming by Demonstration and Programming by Instruction using Golog
Towards the Integration of Programming by Demonstration and Programming by Instruction using Golog Christian Fritz and Yolanda Gil Information Sciences Institute University of Southern California Marina
More informationif t 1,...,t k Terms and P k is a k-ary predicate, then P k (t 1,...,t k ) Formulas (atomic formulas)
FOL Query Evaluation Giuseppe De Giacomo Università di Roma La Sapienza Corso di Seminari di Ingegneria del Software: Data and Service Integration Laurea Specialistica in Ingegneria Informatica Università
More informationDecidable Reasoning in a Modified Situation Calculus
Decidable Reasoning in a Modified Situation Calculus Yilan Gu Dept. of Computer Science University of Toronto 10 King s College Road Toronto, ON, M5S 3G4, Canada Email: yilan@cs.toronto.edu Abstract We
More informationExtensions: Concurrency, Interrupts, Sensing
IIc. Procedural action programs 1 Extensions: Concurrency, Interrupts, Sensing Exogenous actions Concurrency and interrupts in GOLOG A transitional semantics for GOLOG Sensing actions Mailbot in a Constantly
More informationFirst Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics
CS1081 First Order Logic: Syntax and Semantics COMP30412 Sean Bechhofer sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk Problems Propositional logic isn t very expressive As an example, consider p = Scotland won on Saturday
More informationFrom: AAAI Technical Report FS Compilation copyright 1994, AAAI ( All rights reserved. Forget It!
From: AAAI Technical Report FS-94-02. Compilation copyright 1994, AAAI (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. Forget It! Fangzhen Lin and Ray Reiter* Department of Computer Science University of Toronto
More informationLogic: Propositional Logic (Part I)
Logic: Propositional Logic (Part I) Alessandro Artale Free University of Bozen-Bolzano Faculty of Computer Science http://www.inf.unibz.it/ artale Descrete Mathematics and Logic BSc course Thanks to Prof.
More informationBelief Revision and Progression of KBs in the Epistemic Situation Calculus
Belief Revision and Progression of KBs in the Epistemic Situation Calculus Christoph Schwering 1 Gerhard Lakemeyer 1 Maurice Pagnucco 2 1 RWTH Aachen University, Germany 2 University of New South Wales,
More informationKB Agents and Propositional Logic
Plan Knowledge-Based Agents Logics Propositional Logic KB Agents and Propositional Logic Announcements Assignment2 mailed out last week. Questions? Knowledge-Based Agents So far, what we ve done is look
More informationIntroduction to Kleene Algebras
Introduction to Kleene Algebras Riccardo Pucella Basic Notions Seminar December 1, 2005 Introduction to Kleene Algebras p.1 Idempotent Semirings An idempotent semiring is a structure S = (S, +,, 1, 0)
More informationAxiomatic Semantics. Hoare s Correctness Triplets Dijkstra s Predicate Transformers
Axiomatic Semantics Hoare s Correctness Triplets Dijkstra s Predicate Transformers Goal of a program = IO Relation Problem Specification Properties satisfied by the input and expected of the output (usually
More informationIntelligent Agents. Formal Characteristics of Planning. Ute Schmid. Cognitive Systems, Applied Computer Science, Bamberg University
Intelligent Agents Formal Characteristics of Planning Ute Schmid Cognitive Systems, Applied Computer Science, Bamberg University Extensions to the slides for chapter 3 of Dana Nau with contributions by
More informationHoare Logic: Reasoning About Imperative Programs
Hoare Logic: Reasoning About Imperative Programs COMP1600 / COMP6260 Dirk Pattinson Australian National University Semester 2, 2018 Programming Paradigms Functional. (Haskell, SML, OCaml,... ) main paradigm:
More informationModelling PRS-Like Agents Mental States
Modelling PRS-Like Agents Mental States Wayne Wobcke School of Computer Science and Engineering University of New South Wales Sydney NSW 2052, Australia wobcke@cse.unsw.edu.au Abstract. In recent years,
More informationKecerdasan Buatan M. Ali Fauzi
Kecerdasan Buatan M. Ali Fauzi Artificial Intelligence M. Ali Fauzi Logical Agents M. Ali Fauzi In which we design agents that can form representations of the would, use a process of inference to derive
More informationPlan Generation and Plan Execution in Agent Programming
Plan Generation and Plan Execution in Agent Programming M. Birna van Riemsdijk and Mehdi Dastani Institute of Information and Computing Sciences Utrecht University The Netherlands {birna, mehdi}@cs.uu.nl
More informationEfficient Reasoning in Proper Knowledge Bases with Unknown Individuals
Efficient Reasoning in Proper Knowledge Bases with Unknown Individuals Giuseppe De Giacomo Sapienza Università di Roma Rome, Italy degiacomo@dis.uniroma1.it Yves Lespérance York University Toronto, Canada
More informationThe State Explosion Problem
The State Explosion Problem Martin Kot August 16, 2003 1 Introduction One from main approaches to checking correctness of a concurrent system are state space methods. They are suitable for automatic analysis
More informationApplied Logic. Lecture 1 - Propositional logic. Marcin Szczuka. Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw
Applied Logic Lecture 1 - Propositional logic Marcin Szczuka Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw Monographic lecture, Spring semester 2017/2018 Marcin Szczuka (MIMUW) Applied Logic 2018
More informationinformation at run time. It is also essential to account for cooperation among agents.
Ability and Knowing How in the Situation Calculus Yves Lesperance (lesperan@cs.yorku.ca) Department of Computer Science, York University, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3 Canada Hector J. Levesque (hector@cs.toronto.edu)
More informationLogical Inference. Artificial Intelligence. Topic 12. Reading: Russell and Norvig, Chapter 7, Section 5
rtificial Intelligence Topic 12 Logical Inference Reading: Russell and Norvig, Chapter 7, Section 5 c Cara MacNish. Includes material c S. Russell & P. Norvig 1995,2003 with permission. CITS4211 Logical
More informationTHE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Second Semester COMP2600/COMP6260 (Formal Methods for Software Engineering)
THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Second Semester 2016 COMP2600/COMP6260 (Formal Methods for Software Engineering) Writing Period: 3 hours duration Study Period: 15 minutes duration Permitted Materials:
More informationHoare Logic: Reasoning About Imperative Programs
Hoare Logic: Reasoning About Imperative Programs COMP1600 / COMP6260 Dirk Pattinson Australian National University Semester 2, 2017 Catch Up / Drop in Lab When Fridays, 15.00-17.00 Where N335, CSIT Building
More informationINF5390 Kunstig intelligens. Logical Agents. Roar Fjellheim
INF5390 Kunstig intelligens Logical Agents Roar Fjellheim Outline Knowledge-based agents The Wumpus world Knowledge representation Logical reasoning Propositional logic Wumpus agent Summary AIMA Chapter
More informationReasoning About Knowledge and Action in an Epistemic Event Calculus. Rob Miller Leora Morgenstern Theodore Patkos UCL SAIC FORTH
Reasoning About Knowledge and Action in an Epistemic Event Calculus Rob Miller Leora Morgenstern Theodore Patkos UCL SAIC FORTH http://www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/efec Two Classical Event Calculus Variants
More informationProgram verification. 18 October 2017
Program verification 18 October 2017 Example revisited // assume(n>2); void partition(int a[], int n) { int pivot = a[0]; int lo = 1, hi = n-1; while (lo
More informationI N F S Y S R E S E A R C H R E P O R T REASONING ABOUT ACTIONS WITH SENSING UNDER QUALITATIVE AND PROBABILISTIC UNCERTAINTY
I N F S Y S R E S E A R C H R E P O R T INSTITUT FÜR INFORMATIONSSYSTEME ARBEITSBEREICH WISSENSBASIERTE SYSTEME REASONING ABOUT ACTIONS WITH SENSING UNDER QUALITATIVE AND PROBABILISTIC UNCERTAINTY LUCA
More informationIntention recognition in the Situation Calculus and Probability Theory frameworks
Intention recognition in the Situation Calculus and Probability Theory frameworks Robert Demolombe 1 and Ana Mara Otermin Fernandez 2 1 OERA Toulouse France Robert.Demolombe@cert.fr 2 OERA Toulouse France
More informationPropositional Logic: Methods of Proof (Part II)
Propositional Logic: Methods of Proof (Part II) You will be expected to know Basic definitions Inference, derive, sound, complete Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) Convert a Boolean formula to CNF Do a short
More informationIntroduction to Temporal Logic. The purpose of temporal logics is to specify properties of dynamic systems. These can be either
Introduction to Temporal Logic The purpose of temporal logics is to specify properties of dynamic systems. These can be either Desired properites. Often liveness properties like In every infinite run action
More informationAutomata-based Verification - III
CS3172: Advanced Algorithms Automata-based Verification - III Howard Barringer Room KB2.20/22: email: howard.barringer@manchester.ac.uk March 2005 Third Topic Infinite Word Automata Motivation Büchi Automata
More informationLecture Notes on Software Model Checking
15-414: Bug Catching: Automated Program Verification Lecture Notes on Software Model Checking Matt Fredrikson André Platzer Carnegie Mellon University Lecture 19 1 Introduction So far we ve focused on
More informationAutomata-based Verification - III
COMP30172: Advanced Algorithms Automata-based Verification - III Howard Barringer Room KB2.20: email: howard.barringer@manchester.ac.uk March 2009 Third Topic Infinite Word Automata Motivation Büchi Automata
More informationSystems of modal logic
499 Modal and Temporal Logic Systems of modal logic Marek Sergot Department of Computing Imperial College, London utumn 2008 Further reading: B.F. Chellas, Modal logic: an introduction. Cambridge University
More informationGeneralized Planning: Synthesizing Plans that Work for Multiple Environments
Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence Generalized Planning: Synthesizing Plans that Work for Multiple Environments Yuxiao Hu Department of Computer
More informationClassical Propositional Logic
The Language of A Henkin-style Proof for Natural Deduction January 16, 2013 The Language of A Henkin-style Proof for Natural Deduction Logic Logic is the science of inference. Given a body of information,
More informationChapter 2: Finite Automata
Chapter 2: Finite Automata 2.1 States, State Diagrams, and Transitions Finite automaton is the simplest acceptor or recognizer for language specification. It is also the simplest model of a computer. A
More informationHandling Implication and Universal Quantification Constraints in FLUX
Handling Implication and Universal Quantification Constraints in FLUX Michael Thielscher Dresden University of Technology, 01062 Dresden, Germany, mit@inf.tu-dresden.de Abstract. FLUX is a CLP-approach
More informationAxiomatic Semantics. Semantics of Programming Languages course. Joosep Rõõmusaare
Axiomatic Semantics Semantics of Programming Languages course Joosep Rõõmusaare 2014 Direct Proofs of Program Correctness Partial correctness properties are properties expressing that if a given program
More informationMulti-agent actions under uncertainty: situation calculus, discrete time, plans and policies
Multi-agent actions under uncertainty: situation calculus, discrete time, plans and policies David Poole Department of Computer Science University of British Columbia Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6T 1Z4 poole@cs.ubc.ca
More informationRepresenting Beliefs in the Fluent Calculus
Representing Beliefs in the Fluent Calculus Yi Jin and Michael Thielscher 1 Abstract. Action formalisms like the uent calculus have been developed to endow logic-based agents with the abilities to reason
More informationGAME-THEORETIC GOLOG UNDER PARTIAL OBSERVABILITY
I N F S Y S R E S E A R C H R E P O R T INSTITUT FÜR INFORMATIONSSYSTEME ARBEITSBEREICH WISSENSBASIERTE SYSTEME GAME-THEORETIC GOLOG UNDER PARTIAL OBSERVABILITY ALBERTO FINZI THOMAS LUKASIEWICZ INFSYS
More information