Reasoning About Web Services in a Temporal Action Logic

  • Alberto Martelli
  • Laura Giordano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4155)


The paper presents an approach to reasoning about Web services in a temporal action theory. Web services are described by specifying their interaction protocols in an action theory based on a dynamic, linear-time, temporal logic. The proposed framework is based on a social approach to agent communication, where the effects of communicative actions allow changes in the social state, and interaction protocols are defined in terms of the creation and fulfillment of commitments and permissions among the agents. We show how to introduce epistemic operators in the action theory to deal with incomplete information, and we address the problem of verifying properties of Web services, as well as the problem of reasoning about the composition of Web services.


Temporal Logic Multiagent System Service Composition Epistemic Modality Social Approach 
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.
    Baldoni, M., Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Patti, V.: Reasoning about complex actions with incomplete knowledge: A modal approach. In: Restivo, A., Ronchi Della Rocca, S., Roversi, L. (eds.) ICTCS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2202, pp. 405–425. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berardi, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M., Calvanese, D.: Synthesis of Underspecified Composite e-Services based on Automated Reasoning. In: Proc. ICSOC 2004, pp. 105–114 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dal Lago, U., Pistore, M., Traverso, P.: Planning with a Language for Extended Goals. In: AAAI 2002, pp. 447–454 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dignum, F., Greaves, M.: Issues in Agent Communication: An Introduction. In: Dignum, F., Greaves, M. (eds.) Issues in Agent Communication. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1916, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fornara, N., Colombetti, M.: Defining Interaction Protocols using a Commitment-based Agent Communication Language. In: Proc. AAMAS 2003, Melbourne, pp. 520–527 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Giordano, L., Martelli, A.: Tableau-based Automata Construction for Dynamic Linear Time Temporal Logic. In: Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 46(3), pp. 289–315. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Schwind, C.B.: Verifying Communicating Agents by Model Checking in a Temporal Action Logic. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3229, pp. 57–69. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Schwind, C.: Specialization of Interaction Protocols in a Temporal Action Logic. In: LCMAS 2005 (3rd Int. Workshop on Logic and Communication in Multi- Agent Systems). ENTCS, vol. 157(4), pp. 1–138 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giordano, L., Martelli, A., Schwind, C.: Specifying and Verifying Interaction Protocols in a Temporal Action Logic. Journal of Applied Logic (Special issue on Logic Based Agent Verification) (to appear, 2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greaves, M., Holmback, H., Bradshaw, J.: What Is a Conversation Policy? In: Dignum, F.P.M., Greaves, M. (eds.) Issues in Agent Communication. LNCS, vol. 1916, pp. 118–131. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guerin, F., Pitt, J.: Verification and Compliance Testing. In: Huget, M.-P. (ed.) Communication in Multiagent Systems. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2650, pp. 98–112. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henriksen, J.G., Thiagarajan, P.S.: Dynamic Linear Time Temporal Logic. Annals of Pure and Applied logic 96(1-3), 187–207 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jennings, N.R.: Commitments and Conventions: the foundation of coordination in multi-agent systems. The knowledge engineering review 8(3), 233–250 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maudet, N., Chaib-draa, B.: Commitment-based and dialogue-game based protocols: New trends in agent communication languages. The Knowledge Engineering Review 17(2), 157–179 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Narayanan, S., McIlraith, S.: Simulation, Verification and Automated Composition of Web Services. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International World Wide Web Conference (WWW-11), pp. 77–88 (May 2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petrick, R., Bacchus, F.: A knowledge-based approach to planning with incomplete information and sensing. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning (AIPS), pp. 212–222 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pistore, M., Traverso, P.: Planning as Model Checking for Extended Goals in Non-deterministic Domains. In: Proc. IJCAI 2001, Seattle, pp. 479–484 (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pistore, M., Traverso, P., Bertoli, P.: Automated Composition of Web Services by Planning in Asynchronous Domains. In: ICAPS 2005, pp. 2–11 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pistore, M., Marconi, A., Bertoli, P., Traverso, P.: Automated Composition of Web Services by Planning at the Knowledge Level. In: Proc. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1252–1259 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reiter, R.: The frame problem in the situation calculus: A simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. In: Lifschitz, V. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation: Papers in Honor of John McCarthy, pp. 359–380. Academic Press, London (1991)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Singh, M.P.: Agent communication languages: Rethinking the principles. IEEE Computer 31(12), 40–47 (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Singh, M.P.: A social semantics for Agent Communication Languages. In: Dignum, F.P.M., Greaves, M. (eds.) Issues in Agent Communication. LNCS, vol. 1916, pp. 31–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Srivastava, B., Koehler, J.: Web Service Composition - Current Solutions and Open Problems. In: Srivastava, B., Koehler, J. (eds.) ICAPS 2003 Workshop on Planning for Web Services, Trento, Italy, pp. 28–35 (June 2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yolum, P., Singh, M.P.: Flexible Protocol Specification and Execution: Applying Event Calculus Planning using Commitments. In: Falcone, R., Barber, S., Korba, L., Singh, M.P. (eds.) AAMAS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2631, pp. 527–534. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alberto Martelli
    • 1
  • Laura Giordano
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità di TorinoTorino
  2. 2.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità del Piemonte OrientaleAlessandria

Personalised recommendations