2,752 research outputs found

    Structure and Complexity in Planning with Unary Operators

    Full text link
    Unary operator domains -- i.e., domains in which operators have a single effect -- arise naturally in many control problems. In its most general form, the problem of STRIPS planning in unary operator domains is known to be as hard as the general STRIPS planning problem -- both are PSPACE-complete. However, unary operator domains induce a natural structure, called the domain's causal graph. This graph relates between the preconditions and effect of each domain operator. Causal graphs were exploited by Williams and Nayak in order to analyze plan generation for one of the controllers in NASA's Deep-Space One spacecraft. There, they utilized the fact that when this graph is acyclic, a serialization ordering over any subgoal can be obtained quickly. In this paper we conduct a comprehensive study of the relationship between the structure of a domain's causal graph and the complexity of planning in this domain. On the positive side, we show that a non-trivial polynomial time plan generation algorithm exists for domains whose causal graph induces a polytree with a constant bound on its node indegree. On the negative side, we show that even plan existence is hard when the graph is a directed-path singly connected DAG. More generally, we show that the number of paths in the causal graph is closely related to the complexity of planning in the associated domain. Finally we relate our results to the question of complexity of planning with serializable subgoals

    The GRT Planning System: Backward Heuristic Construction in Forward State-Space Planning

    Full text link
    This paper presents GRT, a domain-independent heuristic planning system for STRIPS worlds. GRT solves problems in two phases. In the pre-processing phase, it estimates the distance between each fact and the goals of the problem, in a backward direction. Then, in the search phase, these estimates are used in order to further estimate the distance between each intermediate state and the goals, guiding so the search process in a forward direction and on a best-first basis. The paper presents the benefits from the adoption of opposite directions between the preprocessing and the search phases, discusses some difficulties that arise in the pre-processing phase and introduces techniques to cope with them. Moreover, it presents several methods of improving the efficiency of the heuristic, by enriching the representation and by reducing the size of the problem. Finally, a method of overcoming local optimal states, based on domain axioms, is proposed. According to it, difficult problems are decomposed into easier sub-problems that have to be solved sequentially. The performance results from various domains, including those of the recent planning competitions, show that GRT is among the fastest planners

    FLECS: Planning with a Flexible Commitment Strategy

    Full text link
    There has been evidence that least-commitment planners can efficiently handle planning problems that involve difficult goal interactions. This evidence has led to the common belief that delayed-commitment is the "best" possible planning strategy. However, we recently found evidence that eager-commitment planners can handle a variety of planning problems more efficiently, in particular those with difficult operator choices. Resigned to the futility of trying to find a universally successful planning strategy, we devised a planner that can be used to study which domains and problems are best for which planning strategies. In this article we introduce this new planning algorithm, FLECS, which uses a FLExible Commitment Strategy with respect to plan-step orderings. It is able to use any strategy from delayed-commitment to eager-commitment. The combination of delayed and eager operator-ordering commitments allows FLECS to take advantage of the benefits of explicitly using a simulated execution state and reasoning about planning constraints. FLECS can vary its commitment strategy across different problems and domains, and also during the course of a single planning problem. FLECS represents a novel contribution to planning in that it explicitly provides the choice of which commitment strategy to use while planning. FLECS provides a framework to investigate the mapping from planning domains and problems to efficient planning strategies.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for an online appendix and other files accompanying this articl

    Enumerating Subgraph Instances Using Map-Reduce

    Full text link
    The theme of this paper is how to find all instances of a given "sample" graph in a larger "data graph," using a single round of map-reduce. For the simplest sample graph, the triangle, we improve upon the best known such algorithm. We then examine the general case, considering both the communication cost between mappers and reducers and the total computation cost at the reducers. To minimize communication cost, we exploit the techniques of (Afrati and Ullman, TKDE 2011)for computing multiway joins (evaluating conjunctive queries) in a single map-reduce round. Several methods are shown for translating sample graphs into a union of conjunctive queries with as few queries as possible. We also address the matter of optimizing computation cost. Many serial algorithms are shown to be "convertible," in the sense that it is possible to partition the data graph, explore each partition in a separate reducer, and have the total computation cost at the reducers be of the same order as the computation cost of the serial algorithm.Comment: 37 page

    Cooperation between Top-Down and Bottom-Up Theorem Provers

    Full text link
    Top-down and bottom-up theorem proving approaches each have specific advantages and disadvantages. Bottom-up provers profit from strong redundancy control but suffer from the lack of goal-orientation, whereas top-down provers are goal-oriented but often have weak calculi when their proof lengths are considered. In order to integrate both approaches, we try to achieve cooperation between a top-down and a bottom-up prover in two different ways: The first technique aims at supporting a bottom-up with a top-down prover. A top-down prover generates subgoal clauses, they are then processed by a bottom-up prover. The second technique deals with the use of bottom-up generated lemmas in a top-down prover. We apply our concept to the areas of model elimination and superposition. We discuss the ability of our techniques to shorten proofs as well as to reorder the search space in an appropriate manner. Furthermore, in order to identify subgoal clauses and lemmas which are actually relevant for the proof task, we develop methods for a relevancy-based filtering. Experiments with the provers SETHEO and SPASS performed in the problem library TPTP reveal the high potential of our cooperation approaches

    A Formal Framework for Speedup Learning from Problems and Solutions

    Full text link
    Speedup learning seeks to improve the computational efficiency of problem solving with experience. In this paper, we develop a formal framework for learning efficient problem solving from random problems and their solutions. We apply this framework to two different representations of learned knowledge, namely control rules and macro-operators, and prove theorems that identify sufficient conditions for learning in each representation. Our proofs are constructive in that they are accompanied with learning algorithms. Our framework captures both empirical and explanation-based speedup learning in a unified fashion. We illustrate our framework with implementations in two domains: symbolic integration and Eight Puzzle. This work integrates many strands of experimental and theoretical work in machine learning, including empirical learning of control rules, macro-operator learning, Explanation-Based Learning (EBL), and Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) Learning.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for any accompanying file
    • …
    corecore