Planning in belief space with a labelled uncertainty graph

Planning in belief space with a Labelled Uncertainty Graph, LUG, is an approach that uses a very compact planning graph to guide search in the space of belief states to construct conformant and contingent plans. A conformant plan is a plan that transitions (without sensing) all possible initial states through possibly non-deterministic actions to a goal state. A contingent plan adds the ability to observe state variables and branch execution. The LUG provides heuristics to guide a regression belief space planner, CAltAlt, and a progression belief space planner, PBSP . The key innovation of the LUG is to compactly represent the optimistic projection of several states (those in a belief state) within a single planning graph. Labels on the actions and literals denote the state projections that include them. We show the improvements of using a LUG by comparing it with a multiple planning graphs (one for each possible world) approach within CAltAlt. We also compare the approach to other conformant planners. Lastly, we outline an algorithm that can adapt the approach to stochastic planning.

[1]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Planning as Heuristic Search: New Results , 1999, ECP.

[2]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Planning with Incomplete Information as Heuristic Search in Belief Space , 2000, AIPS.

[3]  Daniel Bryce,et al.  Planning Graph Heuristics for Belief Space Search , 2006, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[4]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Planning graph as the basis for deriving heuristics for plan synthesis by state space and CSP search , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[5]  Daniel Bryce,et al.  Heuristic Guidance Measures for Conformant Planning , 2004, ICAPS.

[6]  Jana Koehler.  Handling of Conditional Effects and Negative Goals in IPP , 1999 .

[7]  Marco Pistore,et al.  Nusmv version 2: an opensource tool for symbolic model checking , 2002, CAV 2002.

[8]  Avrim Blum,et al.  Fast Planning Through Planning Graph Analysis , 1995, IJCAI.

[9]  Drew McDermott,et al.  A critique of pure reason 1 , 1987, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[10]  Piergiorgio Bertoli,et al.  Improving Heuristics for Planning as Search in Belief Space , 2002, AIPS.

[11]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Decision-Theoretic Planning: Structural Assumptions and Computational Leverage , 1999, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[12]  Nicholas Kushmerick,et al.  An Algorithm for Probabilistic Least-Commitment Planning , 1994, AAAI.

[13]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  The FF Planning System: Fast Plan Generation Through Heuristic Search , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[14]  David E. Smith,et al.  Extending Graphplan to handle uncertainty and sensing actions , 1998, AAAI 1998.

[15]  Randal E. Bryant,et al.  Efficient implementation of a BDD package , 1991, DAC '90.

[16]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Labeled RTDP: Improving the Convergence of Real-Time Dynamic Programming , 2003, ICAPS.

[17]  David E. Smith,et al.  Conformant Graphplan , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[18]  Marco Pistore,et al.  NuSMV 2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking , 2002, CAV.

[19]  John Langford,et al.  Probabilistic Planning in the Graphplan Framework , 1999, ECP.

[20]  Piergiorgio Bertoli,et al.  Planning in Nondeterministic Domains under Partial Observability via Symbolic Model Checking , 2001, IJCAI.

[21]  Edwin P. D. Pednault,et al.  Synthesizing plans that contain actions with context‐dependent effects 1 , 1988, Comput. Intell..

[22]  Piergiorgio Bertoli,et al.  Heuristic Search + Symbolic Model Checking = Efficient Conformant Planning , 2001, IJCAI.