Planning with Goal Utility Dependencies

Work in partial satisfaction planning (PSP) has hitherto assumed that goals are independent thus implying that they have additive utility values. In many real-world problems, we cannot make this assumption. In this paper, we motivate the need for handling various types of goal utility dependence in PSP. We provide a framework for representing them using the General Additive Independence model and investigate two different approaches to handle this problem: (1) compiling PSP with utility dependencies to Integer Programming; (2) extending forward heuristic search planning to handle PSP goal dependencies. To guide the forward planning search, we introduce a novel heuristic framework that combines costpropagation and Integer Programming to select beneficial goals to find an informative heuristic estimate. The two implemented planners, iPUD and SPUDS, using the approaches discussed above, are compared empirically on several benchmark domains. While iPUD is more readily amendable to handle goal utility dependencies and can provide bounded optimality guarantees, SPUDS scales much better.

[1]  Rina Dechter,et al.  Constraint Processing , 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[2]  Tom Bylander,et al.  The Computational Complexity of Propositional STRIPS Planning , 1994, Artif. Intell..

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

[4]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Planning Graph Heuristics for Selecting Objectives in Over-subscription Planning Problems , 2005, ICAPS.

[5]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  Graphical models for preference and utility , 1995, UAI.

[6]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Fifth International Planning Competition , 2006 .

[7]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Bidding and allocation in combinatorial auctions , 2000, EC '00.

[8]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Effective Approaches for Partial Satisfaction (Over-Subscription) Planning , 2004, AAAI.

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

[10]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Partial Satisfaction (Over-Subscription) Planning as Heuristic Search , 2004 .

[11]  Wang De-lin.  On electronic commerce , 2008 .

[12]  Blai Bonet,et al.  A Robust and Fast Action Selection Mechanism for Planning , 1997, AAAI/IAAI.

[13]  Daniel S. Weld,et al.  The LPSAT Engine & Its Application to Resource Planning , 1999, IJCAI.

[14]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Planning with Goal Preferences and Constraints , 2005, ICAPS.

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

[16]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  Reasoning With Conditional Ceteris Paribus Preference Statements , 1999, UAI.

[17]  Parthasarathi Dasgupta,et al.  Searching networks with unrestricted edge costs , 2001, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[18]  Maria Fox,et al.  Exploiting a Graphplan Framework in Temporal Planning , 2003, ICAPS.

[19]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  UCP-Networks: A Directed Graphical Representation of Conditional Utilities , 2001, UAI.

[20]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Reviving Integer Programming Approaches for AI Planning: A Branch-and-Cut Framework , 2005, ICAPS.

[21]  David E. Smith.  Choosing Objectives in Over-Subscription Planning , 2004, ICAPS.

[22]  Steve Hanks,et al.  Optimal Planning with a Goal-directed Utility Model , 1994, AIPS.

[23]  M. Fox,et al.  The 3rd International Planning Competition: Results and Analysis , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..