Skip Navigation

Journal of Logic and Computation 2006 16(3):375-402; doi:10.1093/logcom/exi084
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by van Riemsdijk, M. B.
Right arrow Articles by Meyer, J.-J. Ch.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Vol. 16 No. 3, © The Author, 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Original Articles

Dynamic Logic for Plan Revision in Agent Programming

M. Birna van Riemsdijk1, Frank S. de Boer2 and John-Jules Ch. Meyer3

1 ICS, Utrecht University, P.O.Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands. Email: birna{at}cs.uu.nl, 2 ICS, Utrecht University, P.O.Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands and CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and LIACS, Leiden University, The Netherlands. Email: frankb{at}cs.uu.nl, 3 ICS, Utrecht University, P.O.Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands. Email: jj{at}cs.uu.nl

In this paper, we present a dynamic logic for a propositional version of the agent programming language 3APL. A 3APL agent has beliefs and a plan. The execution of a plan changes an agent's beliefs. Plans can be revised during execution by means of plan revision rules. Due to these plan revision capabilities of 3APL agents, plans cannot be analyzed by structural induction as in for example standard propositional dynamic logic. We propose a dynamic logic that is tailored to handle the plan revision aspect of 3APL. The logic is one for plans that are restricted in a certain way. For this logic, we give a sound and complete axiomatization. Further, we discuss how this logic for restricted 3APL plans can be extended to a logic for non-restricted plans and we discuss some example proofs, using the logic. Finally, we consider the relation between proving properties of 3APL agents and proving properties of procedural programs.

Keywords: Specification and verification of programs, agent programming languages, dynamic logic, operational semantics, plan revision

Received 26 April 2005.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.