Using DESs for Temporal Diagnosis of Multi-agent Plan Execution

  • Femke de Jonge
  • Nico Roos
  • Huib Aldewereld
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4687)


The most common reason for plan repair are the violation of a plan’s temporal constraints. Air Traffic Control is an example of an area in which violations of the plan’s temporal constraints is rather a rule than an exception. In such domains there is a need for identifying the underlying causes of the constraint violations in order to improve plan repairs and to anticipate future constraint violations. This paper presents a model for identifying the causes of the temporal constraint violations.


External Event Temporal Constraint Constraint Violation Precedence Relation Environment Object 
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.
    Cassandras, C.G., Lafortune, S.: Introduction to Discrete Event Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sampath, M., Sengupta, R., Lafortune, S., Sinnamohideen, K., Teneketzis, D.: Diagnosibility of discrete event systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 40, 1555–1575 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baroni, P., Lamperti, G., Pogliano, P., Zanella, M.: Diagnosis of large active systems. Artificial Intelligence 110(1), 135–183 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pencolé, Y., Cordier, M.: A formal framework for the decentralised diagnosis of large scale discrete event systems and its application to telecommunication networks. Artificial Intelligence 164(1–2), 121–170 (2005)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Birnbaum, L., Collins, G., Freed, M., Krulwich, B.: Model-based diagnosis of planning failures. In: AAAI 1990, pp. 318–323 (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kalech, M., Kaminka, G.A.: On the design of social diagnosis algorithms for multi-agent teams. In: IJCAI 2003, pp. 370–375 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kalech, M., Kaminka, G.A.: Diagnosing a team of agents: Scaling-up. In: AAMAS 2005, pp. 249–255 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carver, N., Lesser, V.: Domain monotonicity and the performance of local solutions strategies for CDPS-based distributed sensor interpretation and distributed diagnosis. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 6(1), 35–76 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horling, B., Benyo, B., Lesser, V.: Using self-diagnosis to adapt organizational structures. In: Proc. 5th Int’l Conf. on Autonomous Agents, pp. 529–536. ACM Press, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    de Jonge, F., Roos, N., Witteveen, C.: Primary and secondary plan diagnosis. In: DX 2006. 17th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis, pp. 133–140. Universidad de Valladolid (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jonge, F., Roos, N., Witteveen, C.: Diagnosis of multi-agent plan execution. In: Fischer, K., Timm, I.J., André, E., Zhong, N. (eds.) MATES 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4196, pp. 86–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roos, N., Witteveen, C.: Diagnosis of plans and agents. In: Pěchouček, M., Petta, P., Varga, L.Z. (eds.) CEEMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3690, pp. 357–366. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roos, N., Witteveen, C.: Models and methods for plan diagnosis. In: FAMAS 2006. Formal Approaches to Multi-Agent Systems, ECAI 2006, Workshop Notes (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Witteveen, C., Roos, N., van der Krogt, R., de Weerdt, M.: Diagnosis of single and multi-agent plans. In: AAMAS 2005, pp. 805–812 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Jonge, F., Roos, N.: Plan-execution health repair in a multi-agent system. In: PlanSIG 2004. Proc. 23rd Annual Workshop of the UK Planning and Scheduling SIG (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Jonge, F., Roos, N., van den Herik, H.: Keeping plan execution healthy. In: Pěchouček, M., Petta, P., Varga, L.Z. (eds.) CEEMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3690, pp. 377–387. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sampath, M., Sengupta, R., Lafortune, S., Sinnamohideen, K., Teneketzis, D.: Failure diagnosis using discrete event models. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 4, 105–124 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Femke de Jonge
    • 1
  • Nico Roos
    • 1
  • Huib Aldewereld
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer Science, Universiteit Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, NL-6200 MD Maastricht 

Personalised recommendations