Evaluating plans through restrictiveness and resource strength

The planning and scheduling framework which is the object of this paper consists in a loosely-coupled integration which is achieved by cascading a classical planner and a general purpose scheduler. The output of the planning phase yields a partially ordered plan which is then integrated with time and resource constraints to produce a scheduling problem. The research described in this paper is aimed at understanding the structural trademarks of the causal knowledge that a scheduling tool can inherit from STRIPS-based reasoners. Specifically, we analyze quality of the plans in terms of two wellknown properties of scheduling problems, namely the Restrictiveness and the Resource Strength. To this end, we describe a set of experiments carried out on a series of state-ofthe-art planners aimed at assessing the bias of different planning strategies in the context of the loosely-coupled framework.

[1]  Nicola Muscettola,et al.  Planning in Interplanetary Space: Theory and Practice , 2000, AIPS.

[2]  Rolf H. Möhring,et al.  Resource-constrained project scheduling: Notation, classification, models, and methods , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  David E. Smith,et al.  Temporal Planning with Mutual Exclusion Reasoning , 1999, IJCAI.

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

[5]  Amedeo Cesta,et al.  Assessing the Bias of Classical Planning Strategies on Makespan-Optimizing Scheduling , 2004, ECAI.

[6]  Amedeo Cesta,et al.  Planning and Scheduling Ingredients for a Multi-Agent System , 2002 .

[7]  Christer Bäckström.  Computational Aspects of Reordering Plans , 1998, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[8]  Amedeo Cesta,et al.  Biasing the structure of scheduling problems through classical planners , 2004 .

[9]  Austin Tate,et al.  O-Plan: The open Planning Architecture , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[10]  Donald E. Brown,et al.  Intelligent Scheduling Systems , 1995 .

[11]  Stephen F. Smith,et al.  Coordinating space telescope operations in an integrated planning and scheduling architecture , 1991, IEEE Control Systems.

[12]  Rainer Kolisch,et al.  Characterization and generation of a general class of resource-constrained project scheduling problems , 1995 .

[13]  Willy Herroelen,et al.  On the use of the complexity index as a measure of complexity in activity networks , 1996 .

[14]  Amedeo Cesta,et al.  Planning with Concurrency, Time and Resources: A CSP-Based Approach , 2005 .

[15]  Ramón Alvarez-Valdés Olaguíbel,et al.  Chapter 5 – HEURISTIC ALGORITHMS FOR RESOURCE-CONSTRAINED PROJECT SCHEDULING: A REVIEW AND AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS , 1989 .

[16]  Hector Geffner,et al.  Branching and pruning: An optimal temporal POCL planner based on constraint programming , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[17]  Ivan Serina,et al.  Planning Through Stochastic Local Search and Temporal Action Graphs in LPG , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[18]  Maria Fox,et al.  PDDL2.1: An Extension to PDDL for Expressing Temporal Planning Domains , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[19]  G. Brightwell,et al.  Counting linear extensions , 1991 .

[20]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver , 2001, Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232).

[21]  Ioannis Vlahavas,et al.  Intelligent techniques for planning , 2004 .

[22]  Malik Ghallab,et al.  Representation and Control in IxTeT, a Temporal Planner , 1994, AIPS.

[23]  Biplav Srivastava,et al.  RealPlan: Decoupling Causal and Resource Reasoning in Planning , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

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