Formally Verifying Dynamic Properties of Knowledge Based Systems

  • Perry Groot
  • Annette ten Teije
  • Frank van Harmelen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1621)


In this paper we study dynamic properties of knowledge-based systems. We argue the importance of such dynamic properties for the construction and analysis of knowledge-based systems. We present a case-study of a simple classification method for which we formulate and verify two dynamic properties which are concerned with the anytime behaviour and the computation trace of the classification method. We show how Dynamic Logic can be used to formally express these dynamic properties.We have used the KIV interactive theorem prover to obtain machine-assisted proofs for all the properties and theorems in this paper.


Dynamic Property Original Program Dynamic Logic Proof Obligation Candidate Class 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. S. Aikins. Representation of control knowledge in expert systems. In Proceedings of AAAI’80, pages 121–123, 1980.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A.J. Bonner and M. Kifer. Transaction logic programming. In Proceedings of the Tenth Internat. Conf. on Logic Programming (IPLP’93), pages 257–279, 1993. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    B. Chandrasekaran. Generic tasks in knowledge based reasoning: High level building blocks for expert system design. IEEE Expert, 1(3):23–30, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Clancey. The advantages of abstract control knowledge in expert system design. In Proceedings of AAAI’83, pages 74–78, 1983. 1983.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Cornelissen, C. Jonker, and J. Treur. Compositional verification of knowledge-based systems: a case study for diagnostic reasoning. In E. Plaza and R. Benjamins, editors, Proceedings of EKAW’97, number 1319 in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 65–80, 1997. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. Dean and M. Boddy. An analysis of time-dependent planning problems. In Proceedings of AAAI’88, pages 49–54, 1988.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Fensel. The Knowledge-Based Acquisition and Representation Language KARL. Kluwer Academic Pubblisher, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Fensel and R. Groenboom. A software architecture for knowledge-based systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 1999. To appear.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Fensel, R. Groenboom, and G. R. Renardel de Lavalette. Modal change logic (MCL): Specifying the reasoning of knowledge-based systems. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 26(3):243–269, 1998.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Fensel and A. Schönegge. Using KIV to specify and verify architectures of knowledge-based systems. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASEC’97), 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Fensel and A. Schönegge. Inverse verification of problem-solving methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 49:4, 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Fensel and R. Straatman. The essense of problem-solving methods: Making assumptions for gaining efficiency. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 48(2):181–215, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Fisher and M. Wooldridge. On the formal specification and verification of multi-agent systems. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 6(1):37–65, January 1997. World Scientific Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Harel. Dynamic logic. In D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. II, pages 497–604. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1984.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Jonker, J. Treur, and W. de Vries. Compositional verification of agents in dynamic environments: a case study. In Proceedings of European V&V Workshop at KR’98, june 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Jungclaus, G. Saake, Th. Hartmann, and C. Sernades. TROLL-a language for object-oriented specification of information systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14(2):175–211, April 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    V.R. Pratt. Semantical considerations on Floyd-Hoare logic. In IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 109–121, October 1976.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    W. Reif. The KIV-approach to Software Verification. In M. Broy and S. Jähnichen, editors, KORSO: Methods, Languages, and Tools for the Construction of Correct Software. Springer LNCS 1009, 1995.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. J. Russell and S. Zilberstein. Composing real-time systems. In Proceedings of IJCAI’91, pages 212–217, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. Steels. Components of expertise. AI Magazine, Summer 1990.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Stefik. Introduction to Knowledge-Based Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. ten Teije and F. van Harmelen. Exploiting domain knowledge for approximate diagnosis. In Proceedings of IJCAI’97, pages 454–459, 1997.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J. Treur and Th. Wetter, editors.Formal Specification of Complex Reasoning Systems,Workshop Series. Ellis Horwood, 1993.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    P. van Eck, J. Engelfriet, D. Fensel, F. van Harmelen, Y. Venema, and M. Willems. Specification of dynamics for knowledge-based systems. In B. Freitag, H. Decker, M. Kifer, and A. Voronkov, editors, Transactions and Change in Logic Databases, volume 1472 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 37–68. Springer Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    F. van Harmelen and J. R. Balder. (ML)2: a formal language for KADS models of expertise. Knowledge Acquisition, 4(1), 1992.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    F. van Harmelen and A. ten Teije. Characterising approximate problem-solving by partial pre-and postconditions. In Proceedings of ECAI’98, pages 78–82, 1998.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    I. A. van Langevelde, A. W. Philipsen, and J. Treur. Formal specification of compositional architectures. In B. Neumann, editor, Proceedings ECAI’92, pages 272–276, 1992.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    B. J. Wielinga, A. Th. Schreiber, and J. A. Breuker. KADS: A modelling approach to knowledge engineering. Knowledge Acquisition, 4(1):5–53, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Perry Groot
    • 1
  • Annette ten Teije
    • 1
  • Frank van Harmelen
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer Science and MathematicsVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamUK

Personalised recommendations