Modeling of аgent-based cyber-physical systems using goal-oriented approach

  • 1 Dept. of Industrial Automation, University of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, Sofia, Bulgaria


Cyber-physical systems (CPS) integrate computing, networking and physical dynamics and are characterized by a high degree of heterogeneity and parallelism, with high dimensionality and complexity, including a variety of decision-making capabilities and control logic. Modeling and simulation of cyber-physical systems are considered important stages in the design, development and operation of CPS and their components. The main aim of the paper is to describe and analyze the evolution of agent based approach in the field of CPS and to define the basic requirements to the agent based systems regarding CPS. Based on O-MaSE methodology a software process model for agent based development of CPS is proposed. The approach includes the creation of 10 models reflecting various aspects and functionality of the CPS. The suggested approach is analyzed in terms of meeting the basic requirements for agent-based systems, imposed by the peculiarities of cyber-physical systems and fundamental requirements for their introducing, such as flexibility/changeability, reliability, reconfigurability, adaptability/agility and dependability.



  1. Rajkumar, R., I. Lee, L. Sha, and J. Stankovic (2010), Cyber-physical systems: the next computing revolution, In Proceedings of the 47th Design Automation Conference, ACM, New York, 2010, pp. 731-736.
  2. NIST, Cyber-Physical Systems Public Working Group (2017), Framework for Cyber-Physical Systems: Volume 1, Overview, Version 1.0, NIST Special Publication 1500-201.
  3. CPS summit (2016), Action Plan - Towards a Cross-Cutting Science of Cyber-Physical Systems for mastering all-important engineering challenges, Final Version, 10th April 2016.
  4. Cruz LAS, Ryashentseva D., Lüder A., Vogel-Heuser B. (2019), Cyber-physical production systems architecture based on multi-agent’s design pattern—comparison of selected approaches mapping four agent patterns, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (2019) 105:4005–4034, 019-03800-4
  5. Lee, E. (2008), Cyber Physical Systems: Design Challenges. Technical Report. Berkeley: University of California.
  6. Selic B. (2003), The pragmatics of model-driven development. IEEE Software, 20(5):19–25.
  7. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A. (2002), Defining platform-based design. EEDesign of EETimes.
  8. Malykhina G. F., Tarkhov D. A. (2018), Digital twin technology as a basis of the industry in future, 18th PCSF 2018 Professional Сulture of the Specialist of the Future,
  9. Kritzinger W., Karner M., Traar G., Henjes J., Sihn W. (2018), Digital Twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification. IFAC-PapersOnLine 51, 1016–1022. URL:, doi: 10. 1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.474.
  10. Grangel-Gonzalez I., Halilaj L., Coskun G., Auer S., Collarana D., Hoffmeister M., Towards a Semantic Administrative Shell for Industry 4.0 Components, 2016 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC), pp.230-237.
  11. DeLoach, S.A. (2006). Engineering organization-based multi-agent systems. In: Garcia A, Choren R, Lucena C, Giorgini P, Holvoet T, Romanovsky A, editors. Software engineering for multi-agent systems IV: research issues and practical applications. Berlin: Springer; 2006, p. 109-25.
  12. Garcia-Ojeda, J. C., Deloach, S. (2010). The O-MaSE process: A standard view. In Proceedings of Workshop FIPA Design Process Documentation and Fragmentation Working Group (DPDF WG) at Multiagent Logics, Languages, and Organisations Federated Workshops (MALLOW 2010) (pp. 55–66), Lyon, France.
  13. Juan, C. Garca-Ojeda, Scott A. DeLoach, and Robby (2009). AgentTool III: From Process Definition to Code Generation, Proc. of 8th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), Decker, Sichman, Sierra, and Castelfranchi (eds.), May, 10–15., 2009, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 1393 - 1394.
  14. Durfee E. H. and Lesser V. (1989), Negotiating task decomposition and allocation using partial global planning, in: L. Gasser and M. Huhns, editors, Distributed Artificial Intelligence Volume II. Pitman Publishing: London and Morgan Kaufmann: San Mateo, CA, 1989, pp. 229–244.
  15. Jennings N. R. and M. Wooldridge (1998). Applications of Agent Technology, in: N. R. Jennings and M. Wooldridge, editors, Agent Technology: Foundations, Applications, and Markets. Springer-Verlag, March.
  16. Wooldridge, M., N. R. Jennings and D. Kinny (2000), The Gaia Methodology for Agent-Oriented Analysis and Design, International Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 3(3):285- 312.
  17. Gómez-Sanz, J. J., Fuentes-Fernández, R. (2015), Understanding agent-oriented software engineering methodologies, in Knowledge Engineering Review, pp.1-24, September 2015 DOI: 10.1017/S0269888915000053
  18. Leitão P. (2013), Towards Self-organized Service-Oriented Multi-agent Systems in: T. Borangiu et al. (Eds.): Service Orientation in Holonic and Multi agent, SCI 472, pp. 41–56. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-35852- 4_3 © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
  19. Al-Safi, Y. and V. Vyatkin (2007). An ontology-based reconfiguration agent for intelligent mechatronic systems, In: Mařík, V., Vyatkin, V., Colombo, A.W. (Eds.), Holonic and Multi-agent Systems for Manufacturing. Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, pp.114-126.
  20. Vrba, P., M. Radakovič, M. Obitko, and V. Mařik (2011), Semantic technologies: latest advances in agent-based manufacturing control systems, Int. J. Prod. Res., 49(5), 2011, pp.1483-1496.
  21. Cruz LAS, Mayer F., Schütz D., Vogel-Heuser B. (2018), Platform Independent Multi-Agent System for Robust Networks of Production Systems, IFAC-Papers On Line, Volume 51, Issue 11, pp. 1261-1268.

Article full text

Download PDF