314 research outputs found

    Taming Numbers and Durations in the Model Checking Integrated Planning System

    Full text link
    The Model Checking Integrated Planning System (MIPS) is a temporal least commitment heuristic search planner based on a flexible object-oriented workbench architecture. Its design clearly separates explicit and symbolic directed exploration algorithms from the set of on-line and off-line computed estimates and associated data structures. MIPS has shown distinguished performance in the last two international planning competitions. In the last event the description language was extended from pure propositional planning to include numerical state variables, action durations, and plan quality objective functions. Plans were no longer sequences of actions but time-stamped schedules. As a participant of the fully automated track of the competition, MIPS has proven to be a general system; in each track and every benchmark domain it efficiently computed plans of remarkable quality. This article introduces and analyzes the most important algorithmic novelties that were necessary to tackle the new layers of expressiveness in the benchmark problems and to achieve a high level of performance. The extensions include critical path analysis of sequentially generated plans to generate corresponding optimal parallel plans. The linear time algorithm to compute the parallel plan bypasses known NP hardness results for partial ordering by scheduling plans with respect to the set of actions and the imposed precedence relations. The efficiency of this algorithm also allows us to improve the exploration guidance: for each encountered planning state the corresponding approximate sequential plan is scheduled. One major strength of MIPS is its static analysis phase that grounds and simplifies parameterized predicates, functions and operators, that infers knowledge to minimize the state description length, and that detects domain object symmetries. The latter aspect is analyzed in detail. MIPS has been developed to serve as a complete and optimal state space planner, with admissible estimates, exploration engines and branching cuts. In the competition version, however, certain performance compromises had to be made, including floating point arithmetic, weighted heuristic search exploration according to an inadmissible estimate and parameterized optimization

    Improving Optimization Bounds using Machine Learning: Decision Diagrams meet Deep Reinforcement Learning

    Full text link
    Finding tight bounds on the optimal solution is a critical element of practical solution methods for discrete optimization problems. In the last decade, decision diagrams (DDs) have brought a new perspective on obtaining upper and lower bounds that can be significantly better than classical bounding mechanisms, such as linear relaxations. It is well known that the quality of the bounds achieved through this flexible bounding method is highly reliant on the ordering of variables chosen for building the diagram, and finding an ordering that optimizes standard metrics is an NP-hard problem. In this paper, we propose an innovative and generic approach based on deep reinforcement learning for obtaining an ordering for tightening the bounds obtained with relaxed and restricted DDs. We apply the approach to both the Maximum Independent Set Problem and the Maximum Cut Problem. Experimental results on synthetic instances show that the deep reinforcement learning approach, by achieving tighter objective function bounds, generally outperforms ordering methods commonly used in the literature when the distribution of instances is known. To the best knowledge of the authors, this is the first paper to apply machine learning to directly improve relaxation bounds obtained by general-purpose bounding mechanisms for combinatorial optimization problems.Comment: Accepted and presented at AAAI'1

    Symbolic Search in Planning and General Game Playing

    Get PDF
    Search is an important topic in many areas of AI. Search problems often result in an immense number of states. This work addresses this by using a special datastructure, BDDs, which can represent large sets of states efficiently, often saving space compared to explicit representations. The first part is concerned with an analysis of the complexity of BDDs for some search problems, resulting in lower or upper bounds on BDD sizes for these. The second part is concerned with action planning, an area where the programmer does not know in advance what the search problem will look like. This part presents symbolic algorithms for finding optimal solutions for two different settings, classical and net-benefit planning, as well as several improvements to these algorithms. The resulting planner was able to win the International Planning Competition IPC 2008. The third part is concerned with general game playing, which is similar to planning in that the programmer does not know in advance what game will be played. This work proposes algorithms for instantiating the input and solving games symbolically. For playing, a hybrid player based on UCT and the solver is presented

    Lex-Partitioning: A New Option for BDD Search

    Full text link
    For the exploration of large state spaces, symbolic search using binary decision diagrams (BDDs) can save huge amounts of memory and computation time. State sets are represented and modified by accessing and manipulating their characteristic functions. BDD partitioning is used to compute the image as the disjunction of smaller subimages. In this paper, we propose a novel BDD partitioning option. The partitioning is lexicographical in the binary representation of the states contained in the set that is represented by a BDD and uniform with respect to the number of states represented. The motivation of controlling the state set sizes in the partitioning is to eventually bridge the gap between explicit and symbolic search. Let n be the size of the binary state vector. We propose an O(n) ranking and unranking scheme that supports negated edges and operates on top of precomputed satcount values. For the uniform split of a BDD, we then use unranking to provide paths along which we partition the BDDs. In a shared BDD representation the efforts are O(n). The algorithms are fully integrated in the CUDD library and evaluated in strongly solving general game playing benchmarks.Comment: In Proceedings GRAPHITE 2012, arXiv:1210.611

    ICAPS 2012. Proceedings of the third Workshop on the International Planning Competition

    Get PDF
    22nd International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. June 25-29, 2012, Atibaia, Sao Paulo (Brazil). Proceedings of the 3rd the International Planning CompetitionThe Academic Advising Planning Domain / Joshua T. Guerin, Josiah P. Hanna, Libby Ferland, Nicholas Mattei, and Judy Goldsmith. -- Leveraging Classical Planners through Translations / Ronen I. Brafman, Guy Shani, and Ran Taig. -- Advances in BDD Search: Filtering, Partitioning, and Bidirectionally Blind / Stefan Edelkamp, Peter Kissmann, and Álvaro Torralba. -- A Multi-Agent Extension of PDDL3.1 / Daniel L. Kovacs. -- Mining IPC-2011 Results / Isabel Cenamor, Tomás de la Rosa, and Fernando Fernández. -- How Good is the Performance of the Best Portfolio in IPC-2011? / Sergio Nuñez, Daniel Borrajo, and Carlos Linares López. -- “Type Problem in Domain Description!” or, Outsiders’ Suggestions for PDDL Improvement / Robert P. Goldman and Peter KellerEn prens

    Certifying planning systems : witnesses for unsolvability

    Get PDF
    Classical planning tackles the problem of finding a sequence of actions that leads from an initial state to a goal. Over the last decades, planning systems have become significantly better at answering the question whether such a sequence exists by applying a variety of techniques which have become more and more complex. As a result, it has become nearly impossible to formally analyze whether a planning system is actually correct in its answers, and we need to rely on experimental evidence. One way to increase trust is the concept of certifying algorithms, which provide a witness which justifies their answer and can be verified independently. When a planning system finds a solution to a problem, the solution itself is a witness, and we can verify it by simply applying it. But what if the planning system claims the task is unsolvable? So far there was no principled way of verifying this claim. This thesis contributes two approaches to create witnesses for unsolvable planning tasks. Inductive certificates are based on the idea of invariants. They argue that the initial state is part of a set of states that we cannot leave and that contains no goal state. In our second approach, we define a proof system that proves in an incremental fashion that certain states cannot be part of a solution until it has proven that either the initial state or all goal states are such states. Both approaches are complete in the sense that a witness exists for every unsolvable planning task, and can be verified efficiently (in respect to the size of the witness) by an independent verifier if certain criteria are met. To show their applicability to state-of-the-art planning techniques, we provide an extensive overview how these approaches can cover several search algorithms, heuristics and other techniques. Finally, we show with an experimental study that generating and verifying these explanations is not only theoretically possible but also practically feasible, thus making a first step towards fully certifying planning systems

    Planning Graph Heuristics for Belief Space Search

    Full text link
    Some recent works in conditional planning have proposed reachability heuristics to improve planner scalability, but many lack a formal description of the properties of their distance estimates. To place previous work in context and extend work on heuristics for conditional planning, we provide a formal basis for distance estimates between belief states. We give a definition for the distance between belief states that relies on aggregating underlying state distance measures. We give several techniques to aggregate state distances and their associated properties. Many existing heuristics exhibit a subset of the properties, but in order to provide a standardized comparison we present several generalizations of planning graph heuristics that are used in a single planner. We compliment our belief state distance estimate framework by also investigating efficient planning graph data structures that incorporate BDDs to compute the most effective heuristics. We developed two planners to serve as test-beds for our investigation. The first, CAltAlt, is a conformant regression planner that uses A* search. The second, POND, is a conditional progression planner that uses AO* search. We show the relative effectiveness of our heuristic techniques within these planners. We also compare the performance of these planners with several state of the art approaches in conditional planning

    Symbolic Planning with Axioms

    Get PDF
    Axioms are an extension for classical planning models that allow for modeling complex preconditions and goals exponentially more compactly. Although axioms were introduced in planning more than a decade ago, modern planning techniques rarely support axioms, especially in cost-optimal planning. Symbolic search is a popular and competitive optimal planning technique based on the manipulation of sets of states. In this work, we extend symbolic search algorithms to support axioms natively. We analyze different ways of encoding derived variables and axiom rules to evaluate them in a symbolic representation. We prove that all encodings are sound and complete, and empirically show that the presented approach outperforms the previous state of the art in costoptimal classical planning with axioms.This work was supported by the German National Science Foundation (DFG) as part of the project EPSDAC (MA 7790/1-1) and the Research Unit FOR 1513 (HYBRIS). The FAI group of Saarland University has received support by DFG grant 389792660 as part of TRR 248 (see https://perspicuous-computing.science)
    corecore