Tunneling and Decomposition-Based State Reduction for Optimal Planning

Action pruning is one of the most basic techniques for improving a planner's performance. The challenge of preserving optimality while reducing the state space has been addressed by several methods in recent years. In this paper we describe two optimality preserving pruning methods: The first is a generalization of tunnel macros. The second, the main contribution of this paper, is a novel partition-based pruning method. The latter requires the introduction of new automated domain decomposition techniques which are of independent interest. Both methods prune the actions applicable at state s based on the last action leading to s, and both attempt to capture the intuition that, when possible, we should focus on one sub-goal at a time. As we demonstrate, neither method dominates the other, and a combination of both allows us to obtain an even stronger pruning rule. We also introduce a few modifications to A* that utilize properties shared by both methods to find an optimal plan. Our empirical evaluation compares the pruning power of the two methods and their combination, showing good coverage, reduction in running time, and reduction in the number of expansions.

[1]  Ronen I. Brafman,et al.  From One to Many: Planning for Loosely Coupled Multi-Agent Systems , 2008, ICAPS.

[2]  Malte Helmert,et al.  The Fast Downward Planning System , 2006, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[3]  Yixin Chen,et al.  Completeness and Optimality Preserving Reduction for Planning , 2009, IJCAI.

[4]  Richard E. Korf,et al.  Finding Optimal Solutions to Rubik's Cube Using Pattern Databases , 1997, AAAI/IAAI.

[5]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  COMPLEXITY RESULTS FOR SAS+ PLANNING , 1995, Comput. Intell..

[6]  Patrik Haslum,et al.  Admissible Heuristics for Optimal Planning , 2000, AIPS.

[7]  Malte Helmert,et al.  About Partial Order Reduction in Planning and Computer Aided Verification , 2012, ICAPS.

[8]  Jonathan Schaeffer,et al.  Sokoban: Enhancing general single-agent search methods using domain knowledge , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Carmel Domshlak,et al.  Landmarks, Critical Paths and Abstractions: What's the Difference Anyway? , 2009, ICAPS.

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

[11]  Vipin Kumar,et al.  A Fast and High Quality Multilevel Scheme for Partitioning Irregular Graphs , 1998, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[12]  Andrew Coles,et al.  Completeness-Preserving Pruning for Optimal Planning , 2010, ECAI.

[13]  Patrice Godefroid,et al.  Partial-Order Methods for the Verification of Concurrent Systems , 1996, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[14]  Jeffrey S. Rosenschein,et al.  Exploiting Problem Symmetries in State-Based Planners , 2011, AAAI.

[15]  Carlos Linares López,et al.  The 2011 International Planning Competition , 2011 .

[16]  Yixin Chen,et al.  Theory and Algorithms for Partial Order Based Reduction in Planning , 2011, ArXiv.

[17]  Antti Valmari A stubborn attack on state explosion , 1992, Formal Methods Syst. Des..

[18]  Maria Fox,et al.  The Detection and Exploitation of Symmetry in Planning Problems , 1999, IJCAI.