Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 239–256 | Cite as

Verifying Multi-agent Programs by Model Checking

  • Rafael H. Bordini
  • Michael Fisher
  • Willem Visser
  • Michael Wooldridge


This paper gives an overview of our recent work on an approach to verifying multi-agent programs. We automatically translate multi-agent systems programmed in the logic-based agent-oriented programming language AgentSpeak into either Promela or Java, and then use the associated Spin and JPF model checkers to verify the resulting systems. We also describe the simplified BDI logical language that is used to write the properties we want the systems to satisfy. The approach is illustrated by means of a simple case study.


Agent-oriented programming AgentSpeak Model checking Spin JPF 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Allen Emerson, E. 1990Temporal and modal logicLeeuwen, J. eds. Handbook of theoretical computer scienceElsevier ScienceAmsterdam9971072(vol. B, Chap. 16)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benerecetti, M., & Cimatti, A. Symbolic model checking for multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the model checking and artificial intelligence workshop (MoChArt-2002), held with 15th ECAI, 21–26 July, Lyon, France, (pp. 1–8).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biesiadecki, J., Maimone, M. W., & Morrison, J. (2001). The Athena SDM rover: A testbed for marsrover mobility. In Sixth international symposium on AI, robotics and automation in space (ISAIRAS-01), June, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bordini, R. H., Fisher, M., Pardavila, C., & Wooldridge, M. (2003). Model checking AgentSpeak. In J. S. Rosenschein, T. Sandholm, M. Wooldridge, & M. Yokoo (Eds.), Proceedings of the second international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS-2003), Melbourne, Australia, 14–18 July, (pp. 409–416) New York, NY, ACM Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bordini, R. H., Fisher, M., Visser, W., Wooldridge, M. 2004aModel checking rational agentsIEEE Intelligent Systems194652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bordini, R. H., Fisher, M., Visser, W., & Wooldridge, M. (2004b) State-space reduction techniques in agent verification. In N. R. Jennings, C. Sierra, L. Sonenberg & M. Tambe (Eds.). Proceedings of the third international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS-2004), New York, NY, 19–23 July (pp. 896–903) New York, NY, ACM Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bordini, R. H., Fisher, M., Visser W., & Wooldridge, M (2004c) Verifiable multi-agent programs. In M. Dastani, J. Dix, & A. El Fallah-Seghrouchni, (Eds.)Programming multi-agent systems, proceedings of the first international workshop (ProMAS-03), held with AAMAS-03, 15 July, 2003, Melbourne, Australia (Selected Revised and Invited Papers), number 3067 in Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, (pp. 72–89) Berlin, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bordini, R. H., Hübner, J. F., et al. (2005) Jason. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bordini, R. H., Hübner, J. F., & Vieira, R. (2005). Jason and the golden fleece of agent-oriented programming. In R. H. Bordini, M. Dastani, J. Dix, & A. El Fallah Seghrouchni, (Eds.) Multi-agent programming: Languages, Platforms and applications, chap. 1 Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bordini, R. H., & Moreira, Á. F. (2004 September). Proving BDI properties of agent-oriented programming languages: The asymmetry thesis principles in AgentSpeak(L). Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 42 (1–3), 197–226. Special issue on computational logic in multi-agent systems.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bordini R. H., Visser W., Fisher, M., Pardavila, C., & Wooldridge, M. (2003). Model checking multi-agent programs with CASP. In W.A. Hunt Jr. & F. Somenzi, (Eds.) Proceedgins of the fifteenth conference on computer-aided verification (CAV-2003), Boulder, CO, 8–12 July, number 2725 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (pp. 110–113) Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Tool description.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clarke, E. M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D. A. 2000Model checkingThe MIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cohen, P. R., Levesque, H. J. 1990Intention is choice with commitmentArtificial Intelligence42213261CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Corbett, J., Dwyer, M., Hatcliff, J., Pasareanu, C., Robby, S. L., & Zheng, H. (2000, June) Bandera : Extracting finite-state models from java source code. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on software engineering, Limeric, Ireland: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    d’Inverno, M., Kinny, D., Luck, M., & Wooldridge, M. (1998). A formal specification of dMARS. In M. P. Singh, A. S. Rao, & M. Wooldridge, (Eds.), Intelligent agents IV—proceedings of the fourth international workshop on agent theories, architectures, and languages (ATAL-97), providence, RI, 24–26 July, 1997, number 1365 in Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, (pp. 155–176). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    d’Inverno, M., Luck, M. 1998Engineering AgentSpeak(L): A formal computational modelJournal of Logic and Computation8127Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fisher, M. (2005, January) Temporal development methods for agent-Based systems. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 10(1), 41–66.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fisher, M., & Visser, W. (2002). Verification of autonomous spacecraft control—a logical vision of the future. In Proceedings of the workshop on AI planning and scheduling for autonomy in space applications, co-located with TIME-2002, 7–9 July, Manchester, UK.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harel, D., Kozen, D., Tiuryn, J. 2000Dynamic logicThe MIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Havelund, K., Lowry, M., & Penix, J. (2001, August). Formal analysis of a space craft controller using SPIN. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 27(8).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hoek, W., Wooldridge, M. 2002Model checking knowledge and timeBošnački, D.Leue, S. eds. Model checking software, proceedings of SPIN 2002 (LNCS Volume 2318)Springer-VerlagBerlin, Germany95111Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Holzmann, G. (1997, May). The Spin model checker. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering, 23(5), 279–295Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holzmann, G. J. (1991). Design and validation of computer protocols. Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Java PathFinder. Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kinny, D. 1993The distributed multi-agent reasoning system architecture and language specificationAustralian Artificial Intelligence InstituteMelbourne, AustraliaTechnical reportGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Labrou, Y., & Finin, T. (1994, November). A semantics approach for KQML—a general purpose communication language for software agents. In Proceedings of the third international conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM’94). ACM Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Muscettola, N., Nayak, P. P., Pell, B., Williams, B. C. 1998Remote agents: To boldly go where no AI system has gone beforeArtificial Intelligence103547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Muscettola, N., Nayak, P. P., Pell, B., & Williams, B. C. (1998b, August) Remote agent: To boldly go where no AI system has gone before. Artificial Intelligence, 103(1–2), 5–47.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Plotkin, G. D. 1981A structural approach to operational semanticsComputer Science Department, Aarhus UniversityAarhusTechnical reportGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rao, A. S. (1996). AgentSpeak(L): BDI agents speak out in a logical computable language. In W. Van de Velde & J. Perram, (Eds.) Proceedings of the seventh workshop on modelling autonomous agents in a multi-agent world (MAAMAW’96) 22–25 January, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, number 1038 in Lecture notes in artificial intelligence (pp. 42–55) London. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rao, A. S., & Georgeff, M. P. (1993) A model-theoretic approach to the verification of situated reasoning systems. In Proceedings of the thirteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-93) (pp. 318–324) Chambéry, France.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rao, A. S., Georgeff, M. P. 1998Decision procedures for BDI logicsJournal of Logic and Computation8293343CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Robby, M. Dwyer, B., & Hatcliff, J. (2003, March). Bogor: An extensible and highly-modular model checking framework. In In the proceedings of the fourth joint meeting of the european software engineering conference and ACM SIGSOFT symposium on the foundations of software engineering (ESEC/FSE).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shoham, Y. (1990). Agent-oriented programming. Technical report STAN–CS–1335–90, computer science department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Singh, M. P., Rao, A. S., Georgeff, M. P. 1999Formal methods in DAI: Logic-based representation and reasoningWeiß, G. eds. Multiagent systems—a modern approach to distributed artificial intelligenceMIT PressCambridge, MA331376Chap. 8Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Visser, W., Havelund, K., Brat, G., & Park, S. (2000). Model checking programs. In Proceedings of the fifteenth international conference on automated software engineering (ASE’00), 11–15 September, Grenoble, France (pp. 3–12) IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Washington, R., Golden, K., Bresina, J., Smith, D. E., Anderson, C., & Smith, T. (1999). Autonomous rovers for mars exploration. In Aerospace conference, 6–13 March, Aspen, CO, Vol. 1 (pp. 237–251) IEEE.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wooldridge, M. 2000Reasoning about rational agentsThe MIT PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wooldridge, M., Fisher, M., Huget, M.-P., Parsons, S. 2002Model checking multiagent systems with MABLECastelfranchi, C.Johnson, W. L. eds. Proceedings of the first international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS-2002), 15–19 July, Bologna, ItalyACM PressNew York, NY952959Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafael H. Bordini
    • 1
  • Michael Fisher
    • 2
  • Willem Visser
    • 3
  • Michael Wooldridge
    • 2
  1. 1.University of DurhamU.K
  2. 2.University of LiverpoolU.K
  3. 3.RIACS/NASA Ames Research CenterU.S.A

Personalised recommendations