Algorithms and Conditional Lower Bounds for Planning Problems

We consider planning problems for graphs, Markov decision processes (MDPs), and games on graphs. While graphs represent the most basic planning model, MDPs represent interaction with nature and games on graphs represent interaction with an adversarial environment. We consider two planning problems where there are k different target sets, and the problems are as follows: (a) the coverage problem asks whether there is a plan for each individual target set, and (b) the sequential target reachability problem asks whether the targets can be reached in sequence. For the coverage problem, we present a linear-time algorithm for graphs and quadratic conditional lower bound for MDPs and games on graphs. For the sequential target problem, we present a linear-time algorithm for graphs, a sub-quadratic algorithm for MDPs, and a quadratic conditional lower bound for games on graphs. Our results with conditional lower bounds establish (i) model-separation results showing that for the coverage problem MDPs and games on graphs are harder than graphs and for the sequential reachability problem games on graphs are harder than MDPs and graphs; (ii) objective-separation results showing that for MDPs the coverage problem is harder than the sequential target problem.

[1]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Model and Objective Separation with Conditional Lower Bounds: Disjunction is Harder than Conjunction * , 2016, 2016 31st Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS).

[2]  Catriel Beeri,et al.  On the menbership problem for functional and multivalued dependencies in relational databases , 1980, TODS.

[3]  Shlomi Maliah,et al.  Partially Observable Online Contingent Planning Using Landmark Heuristics , 2014, ICAPS.

[4]  R. Brafman,et al.  Contingent Planning via Heuristic Forward Search witn Implicit Belief States , 2005, ICAPS.

[5]  Marvin Künnemann,et al.  Quadratic Conditional Lower Bounds for String Problems and Dynamic Time Warping , 2015, 2015 IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[6]  Amir Abboud,et al.  Popular Conjectures Imply Strong Lower Bounds for Dynamic Problems , 2014, 2014 IEEE 55th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[7]  Monika Henzinger,et al.  Unifying and Strengthening Hardness for Dynamic Problems via the Online Matrix-Vector Multiplication Conjecture , 2015, STOC.

[8]  Tsuyoshi Murata,et al.  {m , 1934, ACML.

[9]  Christer Bäckström,et al.  Time and Space Bounds for Planning , 2017, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[10]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Model Checking , 1999, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[11]  Ryan Williams,et al.  A new algorithm for optimal 2-constraint satisfaction and its implications , 2005, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  Leslie Pack Kaelbling,et al.  Planning and Acting in Partially Observable Stochastic Domains , 1998, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Martin L. Puterman,et al.  Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming , 1994 .

[14]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  The Complexity of Markov Decision Processes , 1987, Math. Oper. Res..

[15]  Marco Pistore,et al.  Weak, strong, and strong cyclic planning via symbolic model checking , 2003, Artif. Intell..

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

[18]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Complexity of k-SAT , 1999, Proceedings. Fourteenth Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (Formerly: Structure in Complexity Theory Conference) (Cat.No.99CB36317).

[19]  A. Bagchi,et al.  AND/OR graph heuristic search methods , 1985, JACM.

[20]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[21]  Steven M. LaValle,et al.  Planning algorithms , 2006 .

[22]  Howie Choset,et al.  Principles of Robot Motion: Theory, Algorithms, and Implementation ERRATA!!!! 1 , 2007 .

[23]  Krishnendu Chatterjee,et al.  Efficient and Dynamic Algorithms for Alternating Büchi Games and Maximal End-Component Decomposition , 2014, J. ACM.

[24]  Christer Bäckström,et al.  Refining complexity analyses in planning by exploiting the exponential time hypothesis , 2016, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[25]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  Depth-First Search and Linear Graph Algorithms , 1972, SIAM J. Comput..

[26]  J. Filar,et al.  Competitive Markov Decision Processes , 1996 .

[27]  Neil Immerman,et al.  Number of Quantifiers is Better Than Number of Tape Cells , 1981, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[28]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Which Problems Have Strongly Exponential Complexity? , 2001, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[29]  Reinhard Pichler,et al.  Parameterized Complexity of Optimal Planning: A Detailed Map , 2013, IJCAI.

[30]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Complexity of kSAT , 2007 .

[31]  Hector Geffner,et al.  From Conformant into Classical Planning: Efficient Translations that May Be Complete Too , 2007, ICAPS.

[32]  Hadas Kress-Gazit,et al.  Temporal-Logic-Based Reactive Mission and Motion Planning , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[33]  François Le Gall,et al.  Powers of tensors and fast matrix multiplication , 2014, ISSAC.

[34]  R. Bellman,et al.  Dynamic Programming and Markov Processes , 1960 .

[35]  Virginia Vassilevska Williams,et al.  Multiplying matrices faster than coppersmith-winograd , 2012, STOC '12.

[36]  V. V. Williams ON SOME FINE-GRAINED QUESTIONS IN ALGORITHMS AND COMPLEXITY , 2019, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM 2018).

[37]  Óc XCn Heuristic Search in Cyclic AND/OR Graphs , 1998 .