729 research outputs found

    A Logic Programming Approach to Knowledge-State Planning: Semantics and Complexity

    Full text link
    We propose a new declarative planning language, called K, which is based on principles and methods of logic programming. In this language, transitions between states of knowledge can be described, rather than transitions between completely described states of the world, which makes the language well-suited for planning under incomplete knowledge. Furthermore, it enables the use of default principles in the planning process by supporting negation as failure. Nonetheless, K also supports the representation of transitions between states of the world (i.e., states of complete knowledge) as a special case, which shows that the language is very flexible. As we demonstrate on particular examples, the use of knowledge states may allow for a natural and compact problem representation. We then provide a thorough analysis of the computational complexity of K, and consider different planning problems, including standard planning and secure planning (also known as conformant planning) problems. We show that these problems have different complexities under various restrictions, ranging from NP to NEXPTIME in the propositional case. Our results form the theoretical basis for the DLV^K system, which implements the language K on top of the DLV logic programming system.Comment: 48 pages, appeared as a Technical Report at KBS of the Vienna University of Technology, see http://www.kr.tuwien.ac.at/research/reports

    Reformulation in planning

    Get PDF
    Reformulation of a problem is intended to make the problem more amenable to efficient solution. This is equally true in the special case of reformulating a planning problem. This paper considers various ways in which reformulation can be exploited in planning

    Hybridization of institutions

    Get PDF
    Extended version including all proofsModal logics are successfully used as specification logics for reactive systems. However, they are not expressive enough to refer to individual states and reason about the local behaviour of such systems. This limitation is overcome in hybrid logics which introduce special symbols for naming states in models. Actually, hybrid logics have recently regained interest, resulting in a number of new results and techniques as well as applications to software specification. In this context, the first contribution of this paper is an attempt to ‘universalize’ the hybridization idea. Following the lines of [DS07], where a method to modalize arbitrary institutions is presented, the paper introduces a method to hybridize logics at the same institution-independent level. The method extends arbitrary institutions with Kripke semantics (for multi-modalities with arbitrary arities) and hybrid features. This paves the ground for a general result: any encoding (expressed as comorphism) from an arbitrary institution to first order logic (FOL) deter- mines a comorphism from its hybridization to FOL. This second contribution opens the possibility of effective tool support to specification languages based upon logics with hybrid features.Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT

    Progress in AI Planning Research and Applications

    Get PDF
    Planning has made significant progress since its inception in the 1970s, in terms both of the efficiency and sophistication of its algorithms and representations and its potential for application to real problems. In this paper we sketch the foundations of planning as a sub-field of Artificial Intelligence and the history of its development over the past three decades. Then some of the recent achievements within the field are discussed and provided some experimental data demonstrating the progress that has been made in the application of general planners to realistic and complex problems. The paper concludes by identifying some of the open issues that remain as important challenges for future research in planning

    Validation of QBF Encodings with Winning Strategies

    Get PDF
    When using a QBF solver for solving application problems encoded to quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs), mainly two things can potentially go wrong: (1) the solver could be buggy and return a wrong result or (2) the encoding could be incorrect. To ensure the correctness of solvers, sophisticated fuzzing and testing techniques have been presented. To ultimately trust a solving result, solvers have to provide a proof certificate that can be independently checked. Much less attention, however, has been paid to the question how to ensure the correctness of encodings. The validation of QBF encodings is particularly challenging because of the variable dependencies introduced by the quantifiers. In contrast to SAT, the solution of a true QBF is not simply a variable assignment, but a winning strategy. For each existential variable x, a winning strategy provides a function that defines how to set x based on the values of the universal variables that precede x in the quantifier prefix. Winning strategies for false formulas are defined dually. In this paper, we provide a tool for validating encodings using winning strategies and interactive game play with a QBF solver. As the representation of winning strategies can get huge, we also introduce validation based on partial winning strategies. Finally, we employ winning strategies for testing if two different encodings of one problem have the same solutions

    Integration Schemas for Constraint Answer Set Programming: a Case Study

    Get PDF
    Recently, researchers in answer set programming and constraint programming spent significant efforts in the development of hybrid languages and solving algorithms combining the strengths of these traditionally separate fields. These efforts resulted in a new research area: constraint answer set programming (CASP). CASP languages and systems proved to be largely successful at providing efficient solutions to problems involving hybrid reasoning tasks, such as scheduling problems with elements of planning. Yet, the development of CASP systems is difficult, requiring non-trivial expertise in multiple areas. This suggests a need for a study identifying general development principles of hybrid systems. Once these principles and their implications are well understood, the development of hybrid languages and systems may become a wellestablished and well-understood routine process. As a step in this direction, in this paper we conduct a case study aimed at evaluating various integration schemas of CASP methods

    Optimization Modulo Theories with Linear Rational Costs

    Full text link
    In the contexts of automated reasoning (AR) and formal verification (FV), important decision problems are effectively encoded into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT). In the last decade efficient SMT solvers have been developed for several theories of practical interest (e.g., linear arithmetic, arrays, bit-vectors). Surprisingly, little work has been done to extend SMT to deal with optimization problems; in particular, we are not aware of any previous work on SMT solvers able to produce solutions which minimize cost functions over arithmetical variables. This is unfortunate, since some problems of interest require this functionality. In the work described in this paper we start filling this gap. We present and discuss two general procedures for leveraging SMT to handle the minimization of linear rational cost functions, combining SMT with standard minimization techniques. We have implemented the procedures within the MathSAT SMT solver. Due to the absence of competitors in the AR, FV and SMT domains, we have experimentally evaluated our implementation against state-of-the-art tools for the domain of linear generalized disjunctive programming (LGDP), which is closest in spirit to our domain, on sets of problems which have been previously proposed as benchmarks for the latter tools. The results show that our tool is very competitive with, and often outperforms, these tools on these problems, clearly demonstrating the potential of the approach.Comment: Submitted on january 2014 to ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, currently under revision. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1202.140
    corecore