Skip to main content
Log in

Cooperation, Knowledge, and Time: Alternating-time Temporal Epistemic Logic and its Applications

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Branching-time temporal logics have proved to be an extraordinarily successful tool in the formal specification and verification of distributed systems. Much of their success stems from the tractability of the model checking problem for the branching time logic CTL, which has made it possible to implement tools that allow designers to automatically verify that systems satisfy requirements expressed in CTL. Recently, CTL was generalised by Alur, Henzinger, and Kupferman in a logic known as “Alternating-time Temporal Logic” (ATL). The key insight in ATL is that the path quantifiers of CTL could be replaced by “cooperation modalities”, of the form 《Γ》, where Γ is a set of agents. The intended interpretation of an ATL formula 《Γ》ϕ is that the agents Γ can cooperate to ensure that ϕ holds (equivalently, that Γ have a winning strategy for ϕ). In this paper, we extend ATL with knowledge modalities, of the kind made popular in the work of Fagin, Halpern, Moses, Vardi and colleagues. Combining these knowledge modalities with ATL, it becomes possible to express such properties as “group Γ can cooperate to bring about ϕ iff it is common knowledge in Γ that ψ”. The resulting logic — Alternating-time Temporal Epistemic Logic (ATEL) — shares the tractability of model checking with its ATL parent, and is a succinct and expressive language for reasoning about game-like multiagent systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allen, J. F., H. Kautz, R. Pelavin, and J. Tenenberg, Reasoning About Plans, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alur, R., L. De Alfaro, T. A. Henzinger, S. C. Krishnan, F. Y. C. Mang, S. Qadeer, S. K. Rajamani, and S. TaŞiran, Mocha user manual, University of Berkeley Report, 2000.

  3. Alur, R., T. A. Henzinger, and O. Kupferman, ‘Alternating-time temporal logic’, in Proceedings of the 38th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 100-109, Florida, October 1997.

  4. Alur. R., T. A. Henzinger, F. Y. C. Mang, S. Qadeer, S. K. Rajamani, and S. TaŞiran, Mocha: Modularity in model checking, in CAV 1998: Tenth International Conference on Computer-aided Verification, (LNCS Volume 1427), pp. 521-525, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baltag, A. ‘A logic for supicious players’, Bulletin of Economic Research, 54(1):1-45, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Van Benthem, J., ‘Extensive games as process models’, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 11(3):289-313, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Binmore, K., Fun and Games: A Text on Game Theory, D. C. Heath and Company: Lexington, MA, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bonanno, G., ‘Branching time logic, perfect information games and backward induction’, Games and Economic Behavior, 36(1):57-73, July 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burrows, M., M. Abadi, and R. M. Needham, ‘A logic of authentication’, ACM Transaction on Computer Systems, 8:18-36, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Clarke, E. M., O. Grumberg, and D. A. Peled, Model Checking, The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Van Ditmarsch, H. P., Knowledge Games, PhD thesis, University of Groningen, Groningen, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Druiven, S., Knowledge development in games of imperfect information, Master's thesis, Groningen University, 2002. http://www.ai.rug.nl/~sjoerd/cv/ps/thesis.ps, retrieved october 2002.

  13. Emerson, E. A., ‘Temporal and modal logic’, in J. van Leeuwen, (ed.), Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science Volume B: Formal Models and Semantics, pp. 996-1072, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Emerson, E. A., and J. Y. Halpern, ‘'sometimes’ and ‘not never’ revisited: on branching time versus linear time temporal logic’, Journal of the ACM, 33(1):151-178, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fagin, R., J. Y. Halpern, Y. Moses, and M. Y. Vardi, Reasoning About Knowledge, The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Goranko, V., ‘Coalition games and alternating temporal logics’, in J. van Benthem, (ed.), Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK VIII), pp. 259-272. Morgan Kaufmann, 2001.

  17. Grant, J., S. Kraus, and D. Perlis, ‘A logic for characterizing multiple bounded agents’, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 4(3):351-387, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Halpern, J. Y., and Y. Moses, ‘Knowledge and common knowledge in a distributed environment’, Journal of the ACM, 37(3):549-587, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Halpern, J. Y., and Y. Moses, ‘A guide to completeness and complexity for modal logics of knowledge and belief’, Artificial Intelligence, 54:319-379, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Halpern, J. Y., and M. Y. Vardi', ‘The complexity of reasoning about knowledge and time. I. Lower bounds’, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 38:195-237, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Harel, D., D. Kozen, and J. Tiuryn, Dynamic Logic, The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Harrenstein, P., W. Van Der Hoek, J.-J Meyer, and C. Witteveen, ‘On modal logic interpretations for games’, in Proceedings of the Fifteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-2002), pp. 28-32, Lyon, France, 2002.

  23. Van Der Hoek, W., B. Van Linder, and J.-J. Ch. Meyer, ‘Group knowledge is not always distributed (neither is it always implicit)’, Mathematics for the Social Sciences, 38(2):215-240, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Van Der Hoek, W., and M. Wooldridge, ‘Model checking knowledge and time’, in D. Bosnacki and S. Leue, (eds.), Model Checking Software, Proceedings of SPIN 2002 (LNCS Volume 2318), pp. 95-111. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ladner, R. E., and J. H. Reif, ‘The logic of distributed protocols: preliminary report’, in Proceedings of the 1986 Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge, pp. 207-222, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers: San Mateo, CA, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lomuscio, A., Knowledge Sharing among Ideal Agents. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK, June 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Meyer, J.-J. Ch., and W. Van Der Hoek, Epistemic Logic for AI and Computer Science, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Moore, R. C., ‘A formal theory of knowledge and action’, in J. F. Allen, J. Hendler, and A. Tate, (eds.), Readings in Planning, pp. 480-519 Morgan Kaufmann Publishers: San Mateo, CA, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Osborne, M. J. and A. Rubinstein, A Course in Game Theory, The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pauly, M., Logic for Social Software, PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2001, ILLC Dissertation Series 2001-10.

  31. Pauly, M., ‘A modal logic for coalitional power in games’, Journal of Logic and Computation, 12(1):149-166, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Van Der Meyden, R., and M. Vardi, ‘Synthesis from knowledge-based specifications’, in Proceedings CONCUR'98, 9th International Conference on Concurrency Theory, number 1466 in LNCS, pp. 34-49. Springer, 1998.

  33. Vardi, M. Y., ‘Branching vs. linear time: Final showdown’, in T. Margaria and W. Yi, (eds.), Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS 2001 (LNCS Volume 2031), pp. 1-22, Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, April 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wooldridge, M., ‘A knowledge-theoretic approach to distributed problem solving’, in Proceedings of the Thirteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI-98), pp. 308-312, Brighton, United Kingdom, August 1998.

  35. Wooldridge, M., An Introduction to Multiagent Systems, John Wiley & Sons, 2002.

  36. Wooldridge, M., C. Dixon, and M. Fisher, ‘A tableau-based proof method for temporal logics of knowledge and belief’, Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 8(3):225-258, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wooldridge, M., and N. R. Jennings, Intelligent agents: Theory and practice, The Knowledge Engineering Review, 10(2):115-152, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van der Hoek, W., Wooldridge, M. Cooperation, Knowledge, and Time: Alternating-time Temporal Epistemic Logic and its Applications. Studia Logica 75, 125–157 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026185103185

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026185103185

Navigation