Formal Specification and Analysis of Robust Adaptive Distributed Cyber-Physical Systems
We are interested in systems of cyber-physical agents that operate in unpredictable, possibly hostile, environments using locally obtainable information. How can we specify robust agents that are able to operate alone and/or in cooperation with other agents? What properties are important? How can they be verified?
In this tutorial we describe a framework called Soft Agents, formalized in the Maude rewriting logic system. Features of the framework include: explicit representation of the physical state as well as the cyber perception of this state; robust communication via sharing of partially ordered knowledge, and robust behavior based on soft constraints. Using Maude functionality, the soft agent framework supports experimenting with, formally testing, and reasoning about specifications of agent systems.
The tutorial begins with a discussion of desiderata for soft agent models. Use of the soft agent framework for specification and formal analysis of agent systems illustrated in some detail by a case-study involving simple patrolling bots. A more complex case study involving surveillance drones is also discussed.
- 1.Robots that fly and cooperate. TED talk (2015). Accessed 07 March 2016Google Scholar
- 2.Das, J., Cross, G., Qu, C., Makineni, A., Tokekar, P., Mulgaonkar, Y., Kumar, V.: Devices, systems, and methods for automated monitoring enabling precision agriculture. In: IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (2015)Google Scholar
- 3.Vijay Kumar lab. Accessed 11 March 2016Google Scholar
- 4.Wirsing, M., Hölzl, M., Koch, N., Mayer, P. (eds.): Software Engineering for Collective Autonomic Systems. The ASCENS Approach. LNCS, vol. 8998. Springer, Switzerland (2015)Google Scholar
- 5.Ascens: Autonomic service-component ensembles. Accessed 15 November 2014Google Scholar
- 6.Choi, J.-S., McCarthy, T., Kim, M., Stehr, M.-O.: Adaptive wireless networks as an example of declarative fractionated systems. In: Stojmenovic, I., Cheng, Z., Guo, S. (eds.) MOBIQUITOUS 2013. LNICST, vol. 131, pp. 549–563. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
- 8.Stehr, M.-O., Talcott, C., Rushby, J., Lincoln, P., Kim, M., Cheung, S., Poggio, A.: Fractionated software for networked cyber-physical systems: research directions and long-term vision. In: Agha, G., Danvy, O., Meseguer, J. (eds.) Formal Modeling: Actors, Open Systems, Biological Systems. LNCS, vol. 7000, pp. 110–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Networked cyber physical systems. Accessed 11 March 2016Google Scholar
- 10.Drone swarms: The buzz of the future. Accessed 08 March 2016Google Scholar
- 11.Knightscope. Accessed 11 March 2016Google Scholar
- 12.Liquid robotics. Accessed 11 March 2016Google Scholar
- 13.Why BNSF railway is using drones to inspect thousands of miles of rail lines. Accessed 11 March 2016Google Scholar
- 14.Dantas, Y.G., Nigam, V., Fonseca, I.E.: A selective defense for application layer ddos attacks. In: SI-EISIC (2014)Google Scholar
- 16.Wirsing, M., Denker, G., Talcott, C., Poggio, A., Briesemeister, L.: A rewriting logic framework for soft constraints. In: Sixth International Workshop on Rewriting Logic and Its Applications (WRLA 2006). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
- 17.Hölzl, M., Meier, M., Wirsing, M.: Which soft constraints do you prefer? In: Seventh International Workshop on Rewriting Logic and Its Applications (WRLA 2008). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier (2008)Google Scholar
- 21.Choi, J.S., McCarthy, T., Yadav, M., Kim, M., Talcott, C., Gressier-Soudan, E.: Application patterns for cyber-physical systems. In: Cyber-Physical Systems Networks and Applications (2013)Google Scholar
- 22.Stehr, M.-O., Kim, M., Talcott, C.: Partially ordered knowledge sharing and fractionated systems in the context of other models for distributed computing. In: Iida, S., Meseguer, J., Ogata, K. (eds.) Specification, Algebra, and Software. LNCS, vol. 8373, pp. 402–433. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Kappé, T., Arbab, F., Talcott, C.: A compositional framework for preference-aware agents (March 2016, submitted)Google Scholar
- 28.The maude system. Accessed 15 November 2014Google Scholar
- 32.Dantas, Y.G., Lemos, M.O.O., Fonseca, I.E., Nigam, V.: Formal specification and verification of a selective defense for TDoS attacks. In: Lucanu, D. (ed.) Workshop on Rewriting Logic and Applications (2016)Google Scholar