: Reasoning about knowledge seems to play a fundamental role in distributed systems. Indeed, such reasoning is a central part of the informal intuitive arguments used in the design of distributed protocols. Communication in a distributed system can be viewed as the act of transforming the system's state of knowledge. This paper presents a general framework for formalizing and reasoning about knowledge in distributed systems. We argue that states of knowledge of groups of processors are useful concepts for the design and analysis of distributed protocols. In particular, distributed knowledge corresponds to knowledge that is "distributed" among the members of the group, while common knowledge corresponds to a fact being "publicly known". The relationship between common knowledge and a variety of desirable actions in a distributed system is illustrated. Furthermore, it is shown that, formally speaking, in practical systems common knowledge cannot be attained. A number of weaker variants...

The concept of an agent has recently become important in Artificial Intelligence (AI), and its relatively youthful subfield, Distributed AI (DAI). Our aim in this paper is to point the reader at what we perceive to be the most important theoretical and practical issues associated with the design and construction of intelligent agents. For convenience, we divide the area into three themes (though as the reader will see, these divisions are at times somewhat arbitrary). Agent theory is concerned with the question of what an agent is, and the use of mathematical formalisms for representing and reasoning about the properties of agents. Agent architectures can be thought of as software engineering models of agents; researchers in this area are primarily concerned with the problem of constructing software or hardware systems that will satisfy the properties specified by agent theorists. Finally, agent languages are software systems for programming and experimenting with agents; these languages typically embody principles proposed by theorists. The paper is not intended to serve as a tutorial introduction to all the issues mentioned; we hope instead simply to identify the key issues, and point to work that elaborates on them. The paper closes with a detailed bibliography, and some bibliographical remarks. 1

In this paper we present a new semantics, called Local Models Semantics, and use it to provide a foundation to reasoning with contexts. This semantics captures and makes precise the two main intuitions underlying contextual reasoning: (i) reasoning is mainly local and uses only part of what is potentially available (e.g., what is known, the available inference procedures), this part is what we call context (of reasoning); however (ii) there is compatibility among the reasoning performed in different contexts. We validate our semantics by formalizing two important forms of contextual reasoning: reasoning with viewpoints and reasoning about belief.

MultiLanguage systems (ML systems) are formal systems allowing the use of multiple distinct logical languages. In this paper we introduce a class of ML systems which use a hierarchy of first order languages, each language containing names for the language below, and propose them as an alternative to modal logics. The motivations of our proposal are technical, epistemological and implementational. From a technical point of view, we prove, among other things, that the set of theorems of the most common modal logics can be embedded (under the obvious bijective mapping between a modal and a first order language) into that of the corresponding ML systems. Moreover, we show that ML systems have properties not holding for modal logics and argue that these properties are justified by our intuitions. This claim is motivated by the study of how ML systems can be used in the representation of beliefs (more generally, propositional attitudes) and provability, two areas where modal logics have been extensively used. Finally, from an implementation point of view, we argue that ML systems resemble closely the current practice in the computer representation of propositional attitudes and metatheoretic theorem proving.

We specify authentication protocols as formal objects with precise syntax and semantics, and define a semantic model that characterizes protocol executions. We have identified two basic types of correctness properties, namely, correspondence and secrecy, that underlie the correctness concerns of authentication protocols. We define assertions for specifying these properties, and a formal semantics for their satisfaction in the semantic model. The Otway-Rees protocol is used to illustrate the semantic model and the basic correctness properties. 1 Introduction Authentication is a fundamental concern in the design of secure distributed systems [14, 25]. In distributed systems, authentication is typically carried out by protocols, called authentication protocols. The primary goal of an authentication protocol is to establish the identities of the parties (referred to as principals in the security literature) who participate in the protocol. Many authentication protocols, however, also acc...

We argue that rather than representing an agent's knowledge as a collection of formulas, and then doing theorem proving to see if a given formula follows from an agent's knowledge base, it may be more useful to represent this knowledge by a semantic model, and then do model checking to see if the given formula is true in that model. We discuss how to construct a model that represents an agent's knowledge in a number of different contexts, and then consider how to approach the model-checking problem.

Problems in logic are well-known to be hard to solve in the worst case. Two different strategies for dealing with this aspect are known from the literature: language restriction and theory approximation. In this paper we are concerned with the second strategy. Our main goal is to define a semantically well-founded logic for approximate reasoning, which is justifiable from the intuitive point of view, and to provide fast algorithms for dealing with it even when using expressive languages. We also want our logic to be useful to perform approximate reasoning in different contexts. We define a method for the approximation of decision reasoning problems based on multivalued logics. Our work expands and generalizes in several directions ideas presented by other researchers. The major features of our technique are: 1) approximate answers give semantically clear information about the problem at hand; 2) approximate answers are easier to compute than answers to the original problem; 3) approxim...

Most known computational approaches to reasoning have problems when facing inconsistency, so they assume that a given logical system is consistent. Unfortunately, the latter is difficult to verify and very often is not true. It may happen that addition of data to a large system makes it inconsistent, and hence destroys the vast amount of meaningful information. We present a logic, called APC (annotated predicate calculus; cf. annotated logic programs of [3], that treats any set of clauses, either consistent or not, in a uniform way. In this logic, consequences of a contradiction are not nearly as damaging as in the standard predicate calculus, and meaningful information can still be extracted from an inconsistent set of formulae. APC has a resolution-based sound and complete proof procedure. We also introduce a novel notion of "epistemic entailment" and show its importance for investigating inconsistency in predicate calculus as well as its application to nonmonotonic reasoning. Most importantly, our claim that a logical theory is an adequate model of human perception of inconsistency, is actually backed by rigorous arguments.

: We present a formal model that captures the subtle interaction between knowledge and action in distributed systems. We view a distributed system as a set of runs, where a run is a function from time to global states and a global state is a tuple consisting of an environment state and a local state for each process in the system. This model is a generalization of those used in many previous papers. Actions in this model are associated with functions from global states to global states. A protocol is a function from local states to actions. We extend the standard notion of a protocol by defining knowledge-based protocols, ones in which a process' actions may depend explicitly on its knowledge. Knowledge-based protocols provide a natural way of describing how actions should take place in a distributed system. Finally, we show how the notion of one protocol implementing another can be captured in our model. Some material in this paper appeared in preliminary form in [HF85]. An abridge...

THE aim of this thesis is to investigate logical formalisms for describing, reasoning about, specifying, and perhaps ultimately verifying the properties of systems composed of multiple intelligent computational agents. There are two obvious resources available for this task. The first is the (largely AI) tradition of reasoning about the intentional notions (belief, desire, etc.). The second is the (mainstream computer science) tradition of temporal logics for reasoning about reactive systems. Unfortunately, neither resource is ideally suited to the task: most intentional logics have little to say on the subject of agent architecture, and tend to assume that agents are perfect reasoners, whereas models of concurrent systems from mainstream computer science typically deal with the execution of individual program instructions. This thesis proposes a solution which draws upon both resources. It defines a model of agents and multi-agent systems, and then defines two execution models, which ...