Planning as Refinement Search: A Unified Framework for Evaluating Design Tradeoffs in Partial-Order Planning

Despite the long history of classical planning, there has been very little comparative analysis of the performance tradeoffs offered by the multitude of existing planning algorithms. This is partly due to the many different vocabularies within which planning algorithms are usually expressed. In this paper we show that refinement search provides a unifying framework within which various planning algorithms can be cast and compared. Specifically, we will develop refinement search semantics for planning, provide a generalized algorithm for refinement planning, and show that planners that search in the space of (partial) plans are specific instantiations of this algorithm. The different design choices in partial-order planning correspond to the different ways of instantiating the generalized algorithm. We will analyze how these choices affect the search space size and refinement cost of the resultant planner, and show that in most cases they trade one for the other. Finally, we will concentrate on two specific design choices, viz., protection strategies and tractability refinements, and develop some hypotheses regarding the effect of these choices on the performance on practical problems. We will support these hypotheses with a series of focused empirical studies.

[1]  Mark A. Peot,et al.  Postponing Threats in Partial-Order Planning , 1993, AAAI.

[2]  Sam Steel,et al.  Integrating Planning, Execution and Monitoring , 1988, AAAI.

[3]  Craig A. Knoblock,et al.  A Comparison of the SNLP and TWEAK Planning Algorithms , 1993 .

[4]  David A. McAllester Automatic recognition of tractability in inference relations , 1993, JACM.

[5]  David Chapman,et al.  Planning for Conjunctive Goals , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Nils J. Nilsson,et al.  Artificial Intelligence , 1974, IFIP Congress.

[7]  Drew McDermott,et al.  Regression planning , 1991, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[8]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Planning as Refinement Search: A unified framework for comparative analysis of Search Space Size and Performance , 1995 .

[9]  Craig A. Knoblock,et al.  Evaluating the Trade-Offs in Partial-Order Planning Algorithms , 1994, AAAI 1994.

[10]  Steven Minton,et al.  Commitment Strategies in Planning: A Comparative Analysis , 1991, IJCAI.

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

[12]  Nicolas Beldiceanu,et al.  Constraint Logic Programming , 1997 .

[13]  Qiang Yang,et al.  AN EVALUATION OF THE TEMPORAL COHERENCE HEURISTIC IN PARTIAL‐ORDER PLANNING , 1994, Comput. Intell..

[14]  Qiang Yang,et al.  Relating the performance of partial-order planning algorithms to domain features , 1995, SGAR.

[15]  N. S. Barnett,et al.  Private communication , 1969 .

[16]  Oren Etzioni,et al.  Statistical methods for analyzing speedup learning experiments , 2004, Machine Learning.

[17]  Douglas R. Smith,et al.  Transformational approach to transportation scheduling , 1993, Proceedings of 8th Knowledge-Based Software Engineering Conference.

[18]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  On the Nature and Role of Modal Truth Criteria in Planning , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[19]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  A comparative analysis of partial order planning and task reduction planning , 1995, SGAR.

[20]  Daniel S. Weld,et al.  UCPOP: A Sound, Complete, Partial Order Planner for ADL , 1992, KR.

[21]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Multi-Contributor Causal Structures for Planning: A Formalization and Evaluation , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[22]  Richard E. Korf,et al.  Planning as Search: A Quantitative Approach , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[23]  James A. Hendler,et al.  Toward a general framework for hierarchical task-network planning , 1993 .

[24]  Douglas R. Smith,et al.  KIDS: A Semiautomatic Program Development System , 1990, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[25]  Matthew L. Ginsberg,et al.  Approximate Planning , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[26]  David A. McAllester,et al.  Systematic Nonlinear Planning , 1991, AAAI.

[27]  Edwin P. D. Pednault,et al.  Generalizing Nonlinear Planning to Handle Complex Goals and Actions with Context-Dependent Effects , 1991, IJCAI.

[28]  Gregg Collins,et al.  Achieving the Functionality of Filter Conditions in a Partial Order Planner , 1992, AAAI.

[29]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Refinement Search as a Unifying Framework for Analyzing Planning Algorithms , 1994, KR.

[30]  Edwin P. D. Pednault,et al.  Synthesizing plans that contain actions with context‐dependent effects 1 , 1988, Comput. Intell..

[31]  S. Kambhampati,et al.  Universal classical planner: an algorithm for unifying state-space and plan-space planning , 1996 .

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

[33]  Earl D. Sacerdoti,et al.  Planning in a Hierarchy of Abstraction Spaces , 1974, IJCAI.

[34]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  On the Utility of Systematicity: Understanding Tradeoffs between Redundancy and Commitment in Partial-ordering Planning , 1993, IJCAI.

[35]  Steven Minton,et al.  Total Order vs. Partial Order Planning: Factors Influencing Performance , 1992, KR.

[36]  James A. Hendler,et al.  Readings in Planning , 1994 .

[37]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Design Tradeoffs in Partial Order (Plan space) Planning , 1994, AIPS.

[38]  Anthony Barrett,et al.  Partial-Order Planning: Evaluating Possible Efficiency Gains , 1994, Artificial Intelligence.

[39]  Austin Tate,et al.  Generating Project Networks , 1977, IJCAI.

[40]  Qiang Yang,et al.  Formalizing planning knowledge for hierarchical planning , 1990, Comput. Intell..

[41]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Heuristics : intelligent search strategies for computer problem solving , 1984 .

[42]  Craig A. Knoblock Automatically Generating Abstractions for Planning , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[43]  Qiang Yang,et al.  Abstraction in Nonlinear Planning , 1991 .

[44]  Rodney J. Douglas KIDS: A Semi-Automatic Program Development System , 1990 .