Domain independent goal recognition

Goal recognition is generally considered to follow plan recognition. The plan recognition problem is typically defined to be that of identifying which plan in a given library of plans is being executed, given a sequence of observed actions. Once a plan has been identified, the goal of the plan can be assumed to follow. In this work, we address the problem of goal recognition directly, without assuming a plan library. Instead, we start with a domain description, just as is used for plan construction, and a sequence of action observations. The task, then, is to identify which possible goal state is the ultimate destination of the trajectory being observed. We present a formalisation of the problem and motivate its interest, before describing some simplifying assumptions we have made to arrive at a first implementation of a goal recognition system, AUTOGRAPH. We discuss the techniques employed in AUTOGRAPH to arrive at a tractable approximation of the goal recognition problem and show results for the system we have implemented

PDDL2.1: An extension of PDDL for expressing temporal planning domains

In recent years research in the planning community has moved increasingly towards application of planners to realistic problems involving both time and many types of resources. For example, interest in planning demonstrated by the space research community has inspired work in observation scheduling, planetary rover ex ploration and spacecraft control domains. Other temporal and resource-intensive domains including logistics planning, plant control and manufacturing have also helped to focus the community on the modelling and reasoning issues that must be confronted to make planning technology meet the challenges of application. The International Planning Competitions have acted as an important motivating force behind the progress that has been made in planning since 1998. The third competition (held in 2002) set the planning community the challenge of handling time and numeric resources. This necessitated the development of a modelling language capable of expressing temporal and numeric properties of planning domains. In this paper we describe the language, PDDL2.1, that was used in the competition. We describe the syntax of the language, its formal semantics and the validation of concurrent plans. We observe that PDDL2.1 has considerable modelling power --- exceeding the capabilities of current planning technology --- and presents a number of important challenges to the research community

The Automatic Inference of State Invariants in TIM

As planning is applied to larger and richer domains the effort involved in constructing domain descriptions increases and becomes a significant burden on the human application designer. If general planners are to be applied successfully to large and complex domains it is necessary to provide the domain designer with some assistance in building correctly encoded domains. One way of doing this is to provide domain-independent techniques for extracting, from a domain description, knowledge that is implicit in that description and that can assist domain designers in debugging domain descriptions. This knowledge can also be exploited to improve the performance of planners: several researchers have explored the potential of state invariants in speeding up the performance of domain-independent planners. In this paper we describe a process by which state invariants can be extracted from the automatically inferred type structure of a domain. These techniques are being developed for exploitation by STAN, a Graphplan based planner that employs state analysis techniques to enhance its performance

Exploiting a graphplan framework in temporal planning

Graphplan (Blum and Furst 1995) has proved a popular and successful basis for a succession of extensions. An extension to handle temporal planning is a natural one to consider, because of the seductively time-like structure of the layers in the plan graph. TGP (Smith and Weld 1999) and TPSys (Garrido, Onaindía, and Barber 2001; Garrido, Fox, and Long 2002) are both examples of temporal planners that have exploited the Graphplan foundation. However, both of these systems (including both versions of TPSys) exploit the graph to represent a uniform flow of time. In this paper we describe an alternative approach, in which the graph is used to represent the purely logical structuring of the plan, with temporal constraints being managed separately (although not independently). The approach uses a linear constraint solver to ensure that temporal durations are correctly respected. The resulting planner offers an interesting alternative to the other approaches, offering an important extension in expressive power