Predictive Models and Abstract Argumentation: the case of High-Complexity Semantics

In this paper we describe how predictive models can be positively exploited in abstract argumentation. In particular, we present two main sets of results. On one side, we show that predictive models are effective for performing algorithm selection in order to determine which approach is better to enumerate the preferred extensions of a given argumentation framework. On the other side, we show that predictive models predict significant aspects of the solution to the preferred extensions enumeration problem. By exploiting an extensive set of argumentation framework features— i.e., values that summarise a potentially important property of a framework—the proposed approach is able to provide an accurate prediction about which algorithm would be faster on a given problem instance, as well as of the structure of the solution, where the complete knowledge of such structure would require a computationally hard problem to be solved. Improving the ability of existing argumentation-based systems to support human sense-making and decision processes is just one of the possible exploitations of such knowledge obtained in an inexpensive way

Efficient Automated Planning with New Formulations

Problem solving usually strongly relies on how the problem is formulated. This fact also applies to automated planning, a key field in artificial intelligence research. Classical planning used to be dominated by STRIPS formulation, a simple model based on propositional logic. In the recently introduced SAS+ formulation, the multi-valued variables naturally depict certain invariants that are missed in STRIPS, make SAS+ have many favorable features. Because of its rich structural information SAS+ begins to attract lots of research interest. Existing works, however, are mostly limited to one single thing: to improve heuristic functions. This is in sharp contrast with the abundance of planning models and techniques in the field. On the other hand, although heuristic is a key part for search, its effectiveness is limited. Recent investigations have shown that even if we have almost perfect heuristics, the number of states to visit is still exponential. Therefore, there is a barrier between the nice features of SAS+ and its applications in planning algorithms. In this dissertation, we have recasted two major planning paradigms: state space search and planning as Satisfiability: SAT), with three major contributions. First, we have utilized SAS+ for a new hierarchical state space search model by taking advantage of the decomposable structure within SAS+. This algorithm can greatly reduce the time complexity for planning. Second, planning as Satisfiability is a major planning approach, but it is traditionally based on STRIPS. We have developed a new SAS+ based SAT encoding scheme: SASE) for planning. The state space modeled by SASE shows a decomposable structure with certain components independent to others, showing promising structure that STRIPS based encoding does not have. Third, the expressiveness of planning is important for real world scenarios, thus we have also extended the planning as SAT to temporally expressive planning and planning with action costs, two advanced features beyond classical planning. The resulting planner is competitive to state-of-the-art planners, in terms of both quality and performance. Overall, our work strongly suggests a shifting trend of planning from STRIPS to SAS+, and shows the power of formulating planning problems as Satisfiability. Given the important roles of both classical planning and temporal planning, our work will inspire new developments in other advanced planning problem domains

Constraint Propagation in Propositional Planning

Planning as Satisfiability is a most successful approach to optimal propositional planning. It draws its strength from the efficiency of state-of-the-art propositional satisfiability solvers, combined with the utilization of constraints that are inferred from the problem planning graph. One of the recent improvements of the framework is the addition of long-distance mutual exclusion (londex) constraints that relate facts and actions which refer to different time steps. In this paper we compare different encodings of planning as satisfiability wrt the constraint propagation they achieve in a modern SAT solver. This analysis explains some of the differences observed in the performance of different encodings, and leads to some interesting conclusions. For instance, the Blackbox encoding achieves more propagation than the one of Satplan06, and therefore is a stronger formulation of planning as satisfiability. Moreover, our investigation suggests a new more compact and stronger model for the problem. We prove that in this new formulation many of the londex constraints are redundant in the sense that they do not add anything to the constraint propagation achieved by the model. Experimental results suggest that the theoretical results obtained are practically relevant