Experimenting Abstraction Mechanisms Through an Agent-Based Hierarchical Planner

In this paper, an agent-based architecture devised to perform experiments on hierarchical planning is described. The planning activity results from the interaction of a community of agents, some of them being explicitly devoted to embed one or more existing planners. The proposed architecture allows to exploit the characteristics of any external planner, under the hypothesis that a suitable wrapper –in form of planning agent– is provided. An implementation of the architecture, able to embed one planner of the graphplan family, has been used to directly assess whether or not abstraction mechanisms can help to reduce the time complexity of the search on specific domains. Some preliminary experiments are reported, focusing on problems taken from the AIPS 2002, 2000 and 1998 planning competitions. Comparative results, obtained by assessing the performances of the selected planner (used first in a stand-alone configuration and then embedded into the proposed multi-agent architecture), put into evidence that abstraction may significantly speed up the search

A Critical Look at the Abstraction Based on Macro-Operators

Abstraction can be an effective technique for dealing with the complexity of planning tasks. This paper is aimed at assessing and identifying in which cases abstraction can actually speed-up the overall search. In fact, it is well known that the impact of abstraction on the time spent to search for a solution of a planning problem can be positive or negative, depending on several factors -including the number of objects defined in the domain, the branching factor, and the plan length. Experimental results highlight the role of such aspects on the overall performance of an algorithm that performs the search at the ground-level only, and compares them with the ones obtained by enforcing abstraction

Generating Abstractions from Static Domain Analysis

This paper addresses the problem of how to implement a proactive behavior according to a two-tiered (i.e., both theoretical and pragmatic) perspective. Theoretically, we claim that abstraction must be used to render agents able to solve complex problems. Pragmatically, we illustrate a technique devised to generate abstract spaces starting from a “ground” description of the domain being modeled

An autonomous satellite architecture integrating deliberative reasoning and behavioural intelligence

This paper describes a method for the design of autonomous spacecraft, based upon behavioral approaches to intelligent robotics. First, a number of previous spacecraft automation projects are reviewed. A methodology for the design of autonomous spacecraft is then presented, drawing upon both the European Space Agency technological center (ESTEC) automation and robotics methodology and the subsumption architecture for autonomous robots. A layered competency model for autonomous orbital spacecraft is proposed. A simple example of low level competencies and their interaction is presented in order to illustrate the methodology. Finally, the general principles adopted for the control hardware design of the AUSTRALIS-1 spacecraft are described. This system will provide an orbital experimental platform for spacecraft autonomy studies, supporting the exploration of different logical control models, different computational metaphors within the behavioral control framework, and different mappings from the logical control model to its physical implementation

Planning and scheduling research at NASA Ames Research Center

Planning and scheduling is the area of artificial intelligence research that focuses on the determination of a series of operations to achieve some set of (possibly) interacting goals and the placement of those operations in a timeline that allows them to be accomplished given available resources. Work in this area at the NASA Ames Research Center ranging from basic research in constrain-based reasoning and machine learning, to the development of efficient scheduling tools, to the application of such tools to complex agency problems is described

The 1990 progress report and future plans

This document describes the progress and plans of the Artificial Intelligence Research Branch (RIA) at ARC in 1990. Activities span a range from basic scientific research to engineering development and to fielded NASA applications, particularly those applications that are enabled by basic research carried out at RIA. Work is conducted in-house and through collaborative partners in academia and industry. Our major focus is on a limited number of research themes with a dual commitment to technical excellence and proven applicability to NASA short, medium, and long-term problems. RIA acts as the Agency's lead organization for research aspects of artificial intelligence, working closely with a second research laboratory at JPL and AI applications groups at all NASA centers

Agents for educational games and simulations

This book consists mainly of revised papers that were presented at the Agents for Educational Games and Simulation (AEGS) workshop held on May 2, 2011, as part of the Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (AAMAS) conference in Taipei, Taiwan. The 12 full papers presented were carefully reviewed and selected from various submissions. The papers are organized topical sections on middleware applications, dialogues and learning, adaption and convergence, and agent applications

Developmental Bootstrapping of AIs

Although some current AIs surpass human abilities in closed artificial worlds such as board games, their abilities in the real world are limited. They make strange mistakes and do not notice them. They cannot be instructed easily, fail to use common sense, and lack curiosity. They do not make good collaborators. Mainstream approaches for creating AIs are the traditional manually-constructed symbolic AI approach and generative and deep learning AI approaches including large language models (LLMs). These systems are not well suited for creating robust and trustworthy AIs. Although it is outside of the mainstream, the developmental bootstrapping approach has more potential. In developmental bootstrapping, AIs develop competences like human children do. They start with innate competences. They interact with the environment and learn from their interactions. They incrementally extend their innate competences with self-developed competences. They interact and learn from people and establish perceptual, cognitive, and common grounding. They acquire the competences they need through bootstrapping. However, developmental robotics has not yet produced AIs with robust adult-level competences. Projects have typically stopped at the Toddler Barrier corresponding to human infant development at about two years of age, before their speech is fluent. They also do not bridge the Reading Barrier, to skillfully and skeptically draw on the socially developed information resources that power current LLMs. The next competences in human cognitive development involve intrinsic motivation, imitation learning, imagination, coordination, and communication. This position paper lays out the logic, prospects, gaps, and challenges for extending the practice of developmental bootstrapping to acquire further competences and create robust, resilient, and human-compatible AIs.Comment: 102 pages, 29 figure

Artificial Intelligence Research Branch future plans

This report contains information on the activities of the Artificial Intelligence Research Branch (FIA) at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) in 1992, as well as planned work in 1993. These activities span a range from basic scientific research through engineering development to fielded NASA applications, particularly those applications that are enabled by basic research carried out in FIA. Work is conducted in-house and through collaborative partners in academia and industry. All of our work has research themes with a dual commitment to technical excellence and applicability to NASA short, medium, and long-term problems. FIA acts as the Agency's lead organization for research aspects of artificial intelligence, working closely with a second research laboratory at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and AI applications groups throughout all NASA centers. This report is organized along three major research themes: (1) Planning and Scheduling: deciding on a sequence of actions to achieve a set of complex goals and determining when to execute those actions and how to allocate resources to carry them out; (2) Machine Learning: techniques for forming theories about natural and man-made phenomena; and for improving the problem-solving performance of computational systems over time; and (3) Research on the acquisition, representation, and utilization of knowledge in support of diagnosis design of engineered systems and analysis of actual systems