Linear Deductive Planning

Recently, three approaches to deductive planning were developed, which solve the technical frame problem without the need to state frame axioms explicitly. These approaches are based on the linear connection method, an equational Horn logic, and linear logic. At rst glance these approaches seem to be very diierent. In the linear connection method a syntactical condition | each literal is connected at most once | is imposed on proofs. In the equational logic approach situations and plans are represented as terms and SLDE-resolution is applied as an inference rule. The linear logic approach is a Gentzen style proof system without weakening and contraction rules. On second glance, however, and as a consequence of the results rigourously proved in this paper, it will turn out that the three approaches are equivalent. They are based on the very same idea that facts about a situation are taken as resources which can be consumed and produced.

[1]  Michael Thielscher,et al.  Equational Logic Programming Actions, and Change , 1992, JICSLP.

[2]  Joachim Hertzberg,et al.  How to do Things with Worlds: On Formalizing Actions and Plans , 1993, J. Log. Comput..

[3]  Jacqueline Vauzeilles,et al.  Generating Plans in Linear Logic , 1990, FSTTCS.

[4]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  On Formalizing Database Updates: Preliminary Report , 1992, EDBT.

[5]  Steffen Hölldobler,et al.  A New Deductive Approach to Planning , 1989, GWAI.

[6]  John McCarthy,et al.  Towards a Mathematical Science of Computation , 1962, IFIP Congress.

[7]  Bertram Fronhöfer,et al.  Plan Generation by Linear Proofs: On Semantics , 1989, GWAI.

[8]  Michael ThielscherIntellektik,et al.  Actions and Speciicity , 1993 .

[9]  P. Hayes The frame problem and related problems in artificial intelligence , 1971 .

[10]  G. Neelakantan Kartha,et al.  Soundness and Completeness Theorems for Three Formalizations of Action , 1993, IJCAI.

[11]  Josef Schneeberger Plan generation by linear deduction , 1992 .

[12]  Jane J. Robinson A review of automatic theorem-proving , 1967 .

[13]  Michael J. Maher,et al.  Logic Programming Language Scheme , 1986, Logic Programming: Functions, Relations, and Equations.

[14]  Vladimir Lifschitz,et al.  Frames in the Space of Situations , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[15]  Steffen Hölldobler,et al.  Foundations of Equational Logic Programming , 1989, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[16]  Michael Thielscher,et al.  Representing Actions in Equational Logic Programming , 1994, ICLP.

[17]  John McCarthy,et al.  Circumscription - A Form of Non-Monotonic Reasoning , 1980, Artif. Intell..

[18]  Michael Thielscher,et al.  Disjunction in Plan Generation by Equational Logic Programming , 1993, PuK.

[19]  Michael Gelfond,et al.  Representing Actions in Extended Logic Programming , 1992, JICSLP.

[20]  Drew McDermott,et al.  Default Reasoning, Nonmonotonic Logics, and the Frame Problem , 1986, AAAI.

[21]  Richard Fikes,et al.  STRIPS: A New Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving , 1971, IJCAI.

[22]  John McCarthy,et al.  Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge , 1987, NMR.

[23]  John McCarthy,et al.  SOME PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ARTI CIAL INTELLIGENCE , 1987 .

[24]  Lawrence J. Henschen,et al.  What Is Automated Theorem Proving? , 1985, J. Autom. Reason..

[25]  Patrick Lincoln,et al.  Linear logic , 1992, SIGA.