Taming Numbers and Durations in the Model Checking Integrated Planning System

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

The Complexity of Planning Revisited - A Parameterized Analysis

The early classifications of the computational complexity of planning under various restrictions in STRIPS (Bylander) and SAS+ (Baeckstroem and Nebel) have influenced following research in planning in many ways. We go back and reanalyse their subclasses, but this time using the more modern tool of parameterized complexity analysis. This provides new results that together with the old results give a more detailed picture of the complexity landscape. We demonstrate separation results not possible with standard complexity theory, which contributes to explaining why certain cases of planning have seemed simpler in practice than theory has predicted. In particular, we show that certain restrictions of practical interest are tractable in the parameterized sense of the term, and that a simple heuristic is sufficient to make a well-known partial-order planner exploit this fact.Comment: (author's self-archived copy

An Integrated Toolkit for Modern Action Planning

Bützken M, Edelkamp S, Elalaoui A, et al. An Integrated Toolkit for Modern Action Planning. In: 19th Workshop on New Results in Planning, Scheduling and Design (PUK). 2005: 1-11.In this paper we introduce to the architecture and the abilities of our design and analysis workbench for modern action planning. The toolkit provides automated domain analysis tools together with PDDL learning capabilities. New optimal and suboptimal planners extend state-of-the-art technology. With the tool, domain experts assist solving hard combinatorial problems. Approximate or incremental solutions provided by the system are supervised. Intermediate results are accessible to improve domain modeling and to tune exploration in generating high quality plans, which, in turn, can be bootstrapped for domain inference

Temporal Planning with extended Timed Automata

International audienceWe consider a system modeled as a set of interacting agents evolving along time according to explicit timing constraints. In this kind of system, the planning task consists in selecting and organizing actions in order to reach a goal state in a limited time and in an optimal manner, assuming actions have a cost. We propose to reformulate the planning problem in terms of model-checking and controller synthesis on interacting agents such that the state to reach is expressed using temporal logic. We have chosen to represent each agent using the formalism of Priced Timed Game Automata (PTGA). PTGA is an extension of Timed Automata that allows the representation of cost on actions and uncontrollable actions. Relying on this domain description, we define a planning algorithm that computes the best strategy to achieve the goal. This algorithm is based on recognized model-checking and synthesis tools from the UPPAAL suite. The expressivity of this approach is evaluated on the classical Transport Domain which is extended in order to include timing constraints, cost values and uncontrollable actions. This work has been implemented and performances evaluated on benchmarks

Engineering Benchmarks for Planning: the Domains Used in the Deterministic Part of IPC-4

In a field of research about general reasoning mechanisms, it is essential to have appropriate benchmarks. Ideally, the benchmarks should reflect possible applications of the developed technology. In AI Planning, researchers more and more tend to draw their testing examples from the benchmark collections used in the International Planning Competition (IPC). In the organization of (the deterministic part of) the fourth IPC, IPC-4, the authors therefore invested significant effort to create a useful set of benchmarks. They come from five different (potential) real-world applications of planning: airport ground traffic control, oil derivative transportation in pipeline networks, model-checking safety properties, power supply restoration, and UMTS call setup. Adapting and preparing such an application for use as a benchmark in the IPC involves, at the time, inevitable (often drastic) simplifications, as well as careful choice between, and engineering of, domain encodings. For the first time in the IPC, we used compilations to formulate complex domain features in simple languages such as STRIPS, rather than just dropping the more interesting problem constraints in the simpler language subsets. The article explains and discusses the five application domains and their adaptation to form the PDDL test suites used in IPC-4. We summarize known theoretical results on structural properties of the domains, regarding their computational complexity and provable properties of their topology under the h+ function (an idealized version of the relaxed plan heuristic). We present new (empirical) results illuminating properties such as the quality of the most wide-spread heuristic functions (planning graph, serial planning graph, and relaxed plan), the growth of propositional representations over instance size, and the number of actions available to achieve each fact; we discuss these data in conjunction with the best results achieved by the different kinds of planners participating in IPC-4

The 3rd International Planning Competition: Results and Analysis

This paper reports the outcome of the third in the series of biennial international planning competitions, held in association with the International Conference on AI Planning and Scheduling (AIPS) in 2002. In addition to describing the domains, the planners and the objectives of the competition, the paper includes analysis of the results. The results are analysed from several perspectives, in order to address the questions of comparative performance between planners, comparative difficulty of domains, the degree of agreement between planners about the relative difficulty of individual problem instances and the question of how well planners scale relative to one another over increasingly difficult problems. The paper addresses these questions through statistical analysis of the raw results of the competition, in order to determine which results can be considered to be adequately supported by the data. The paper concludes with a discussion of some challenges for the future of the competition series

Snazer: the simulations and networks analyzer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Networks are widely recognized as key determinants of structure and function in systems that span the biological, physical, and social sciences. They are static pictures of the interactions among the components of complex systems. Often, much effort is required to identify networks as part of particular patterns as well as to visualize and interpret them.</p> <p>From a pure dynamical perspective, simulation represents a relevant <it>way</it>-<it>out</it>. Many simulator tools capitalized on the "noisy" behavior of some systems and used formal models to represent cellular activities as temporal trajectories. Statistical methods have been applied to a fairly large number of replicated trajectories in order to infer knowledge.</p> <p>A tool which both graphically manipulates reactive models and deals with sets of simulation time-course data by aggregation, interpretation and statistical analysis is missing and could add value to simulators.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We designed and implemented <it>Snazer</it>, the simulations and networks analyzer. Its goal is to aid the processes of visualizing and manipulating reactive models, as well as to share and interpret time-course data produced by stochastic simulators or by any other means.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p><it>Snazer </it>is a solid prototype that integrates biological network and simulation time-course data analysis techniques.</p