Roots of SPAR — Shared Planning and Activity Representation

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and US Air Force Research Laboratory Planning Initiative (ARPI) has initiated a project to draw on the range of previous work in planning and activity ontologies to create a practically useful Shared Planning and Activity Representation (SPAR) for use in technology and applications projects within their communities. This article describes the previous work which has been used to create the initial SPAR representation. Key examples of the work drawn upon are published in this issue. The paper provides a comprehensive bibliography and related world wide web resources for work in the area of plan, process and activity representation. SPAR is now being subjected to refinement during several review cycles by a number of expert and user panels.

[1]  James A. Hendler,et al.  UMCP: A Sound and Complete Procedure for Hierarchical Task-network Planning , 1994, AIPS.

[2]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[3]  Michael Uschold,et al.  The Enterprise Ontology , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[4]  Northrup Fowler,et al.  The ARPA-Rome Knowledge-Based Planning and Scheduling Initiative , 1995, IEEE Expert.

[5]  Jintae Lee,et al.  Partially shared views: a scheme for communicating among groups that use different type hierarchies , 1990, TOIS.

[6]  Michael Uschold,et al.  Knowledge level modelling: concepts and terminology , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[7]  Michael Grüninger,et al.  The Process Interchange Format and Framework , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[8]  Peter P. Chen.  The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, VLDB '75.

[9]  Kevin Knight,et al.  Building a Large-Scale Knowledge Base for Machine Translation , 1994, AAAI.

[10]  David E. Wilkins,et al.  A Common Knowledge Representation for Plan Generation and Reactive Execution , 1995, J. Log. Comput..

[11]  M. R. Genesereth,et al.  Knowledge Interchange Format Version 3.0 Reference Manual , 1992, LICS 1992.

[12]  John E. Dobson,et al.  ORDIT: a new methodology to assist in the process of eliciting and modelling organizational requirements , 1993, COCS '93.

[13]  C. Cordell Green,et al.  Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving , 1969, IJCAI.

[14]  John F. Sowa,et al.  Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine , 1983 .

[15]  Bob J. Wielinga,et al.  CML: The CommonKADS Conceptual Modelling Language , 1994, EKAW.

[16]  G. M. Nijssen,et al.  Conceptual schema and relational database design - a fact oriented approach , 1989 .

[17]  David A. Marca,et al.  SADT: structured analysis and design technique , 1987 .

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

[19]  James A. Hendler,et al.  A Review of AI Planning Techniques , 1990 .

[20]  Edwin P. D. Pednault,et al.  ADL: Exploring the Middle Ground Between STRIPS and the Situation Calculus , 1989, KR.

[21]  James F. Allen.  Towards a General Theory of Action and Time , 1984, Artif. Intell..

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

[23]  Yolanda Gil,et al.  EXPECT: Explicit Representations for Flexible Acquisition , 1995 .

[24]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Enabling Technology for Knowledge Sharing , 1991, AI Mag..

[25]  Van de velde Breuker.  Common KADS Library for Expertise Modelling , 1994 .

[26]  Marie desJardins,et al.  The Common Prototyping Environment: A Framework for Software Technology Integration, Evaluation, and Transition , 1995, IEEE Expert.

[27]  Austin Tate,et al.  Rationale in planning: causality, dependencies, and decisions , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[28]  Austin Tate,et al.  Representing Plans as a Set of Constraints - the Model , 1996, AIPS.