This paper presents mcmas, a model checker for Multi-Agent Systems (MAS). Differently from traditional model checkers, mcmas permits the automatic verification of specifications that use epistemic, correctness, and cooperation modalities, in addition to the standard temporal modalities. These additional modalities are used to capture properties of various scenarios (including communication and security protocols, games, etc.) that may be difficult or unnatural to express with temporal operators only; a small number of applications are presented in Section[4]. Agents are described in mcmas by means of the dedicated programming language ISPL (Interpreted Systems Programming Language). The approach is symbolic and uses ordered binary decision diagrams (obdds), thereby extending standard techniques for temporal logic to other modalities distinctive of agents. mcmas and all the examples presented in this paper are available for download [14] under the terms of the GPL license.


Model Checker Temporal Logic Multiagent System Security Protocol Reachable State 
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.


  1. 1.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Kupferman, O.: Alternating-time temporal logic. Journal of the ACM 49(5), 672–713 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bordini, R., Fisher, M., Pardavila, C., Visser, W., Wooldridge, M.: Model checking multiagent programs with CASP. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 110–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chaum, D.: The dining cryptographers problem: Unconditional sender and recipient untraceability. Journal of Cryptology 1(1), 65–75 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fagin, R., Halpern, J.Y., Moses, Y., Vardi, M.Y.: Reasoning about Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gammie, P., van der Meyden, R.: MCK: Model checking the logic of knowledge. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 479–483. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van der Hoek, W., Wooldridge, M.: Tractable multiagent planning for epistemic goals. In: Gini, M., Ishida, T., Castelfranchi, C., Johnson, W.L. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2002), pp. 1167–1174. ACM Press, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jamroga, W., van der Hoek, W.: Agents that know how to play. Fundamenta Informaticae 62, 1–35 (2004)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jonker, G.: Feasible strategies in alternating-time temporal epistemic logic. Master’s thesis, University of Utrech, The Netherlands (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lomuscio, A., Sergot, M.: Deontic interpreted systems. Studia Logica 75(1), 63–92 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lomuscio, A., Sergot, M.: A formalisation of violation, error recovery, and enforcement in the bit transmission problem. Journal of Applied Logic 2(1), 93–116 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nabialek, W., Niewiadomski, A., Penczek, W., Pólrola, A., Szreter, M.: VerICS 2004: A model checker for real time and multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Concurrency, Specification and Programming (CS&P 2004). Informatik-Berichte, vol. 170, pp. 88–99. Humboldt University (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Penczek, W., Lomuscio, A.: Verifying epistemic properties of multi-agent systems via bounded model checking. Fundamenta Informaticae 55(2), 167–185Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raimondi, F., Lomuscio, A.: MCMAS - A tool for verification of multi-agent systems, http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/f.raimondi/MCMAS/
  15. 15.
    Raimondi, F., Lomuscio, A.: Automatic verification of multi-agent systems by model checking via OBDDs. Journal of Applied Logic (2005); To appear in Special issue on Logicbased agent verificationGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Somenzi, F.: CUDD: CU decision diagram package - release 2.4.0, http://vlsi.colorado.edu/~fabio/CUDD/cuddIntro.html

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessio Lomuscio
    • 1
  • Franco Raimondi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations