Measuring Plan Diversity: Pathologies in Existing Approaches and A New Plan Distance Metric

In this paper we present a plan-plan distance metric based on Kolmogorov (Algorithmic) complexity. Generating diverse sets of plans is useful for tasks such as probing user preferences and reasoning about vulnerability to cyber attacks. Generating diverse plans, and comparing different diverse planning approaches requires a domain-independent, theoretically motivated definition of the diversity distance between plans. Previously proposed diversity measures are not theoretically motivated, and can provide inconsistent results on the same plans. We define the diversity of plans in terms of how surprising one plan is given another or, its inverse, the conditional information in one plan given another. Kolmogorov complexity provides a domain independent theory of conditional information. While Kolmogorov complexity is not computable, a related metric, Normalized Compression Distance (NCD), provides a well-behaved approximation. In this paper we introduce NCD as an alternative diversity metric, and analyze its performance empirically, in comparison with previous diversity measures, showing strengths and weaknesses of each. We also examine the use of different compressors in NCD. We show how NCD can be used to select a training set for HTN learning, giving an example of the utility of diversity metrics. We conclude with suggestions for future work on improving, extending, and applying it to serve new applications.

[1]  Mark S. Boddy,et al.  Course of Action Generation for Cyber Security Using Classical Planning , 2005, ICAPS.

[2]  Ming Li,et al.  An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications , 1997, Texts in Computer Science.

[3]  lawa Kanas,et al.  Metric Spaces , 2020, An Introduction to Functional Analysis.

[4]  Hector Muñoz-Avila,et al.  Learning Hierarchical Task Networks for Nondeterministic Planning Domains , 2009, IJCAI.

[5]  Khalid Sayood,et al.  Introduction to Data Compression , 1996 .

[6]  Daniel Bryce,et al.  Landmark-Based Plan Distance Measures for Diverse Planning , 2014, ICAPS.

[7]  Robert P. Goldman,et al.  Comparing Strategic and Tactical Responses to Cyber Threats , 2013, 2013 IEEE 7th International Conference on Self-Adaptation and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops.

[8]  Craig A. Knoblock,et al.  PDDL-the planning domain definition language , 1998 .

[9]  Abraham Lempel,et al.  On the Complexity of Finite Sequences , 1976, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[10]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Generating diverse plans to handle unknown and partially known user preferences , 2012, Artif. Intell..

[11]  Indrajit Ray,et al.  Evaluating Diversity in Classical Planning , 2014, ICAPS.

[12]  Manuela Veloso Learning by analogical reasoning in general problem-solving , 1992 .

[13]  Bin Ma,et al.  The similarity metric , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[14]  R. Goldman,et al.  Using Classical Planners for Plan Verification and Counterexample Generation , 2012 .

[15]  Hector Muñoz-Avila,et al.  Learning Methods to Generate Good Plans: Integrating HTN Learning and Reinforcement Learning , 2010, AAAI.

[16]  Karen L. Myers,et al.  Generating qualitatively Different Plans througt Metatheoretic Biases , 1999, AAAI/IAAI.

[17]  Hector Muñoz-Avila,et al.  HTN-MAKER: Learning HTNs with Minimal Additional Knowledge Engineering Required , 2008, AAAI.

[18]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Domain Independent Approaches for Finding Diverse Plans , 2007, IJCAI.

[19]  Dana S. Nau,et al.  SHOP2: An HTN Planning System , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[20]  Alexandra Coman,et al.  Generating Diverse Plans Using Quantitative and Qualitative Plan Distance Metrics , 2011, AAAI.

[21]  Ivan Serina,et al.  Plan Stability: Replanning versus Plan Repair , 2006, ICAPS.

[22]  Daniel Bryce,et al.  HACKAR: Helpful Advice for Code Knowledge and Attack Resilience , 2015, AAAI.