Exploiting Procedural Domain Control Knowledge in State-of-the-Art Planners

Domain control knowledge (DCK) has proven effective in improving the efficiency of plan generation by reducing the search space for a plan. Procedural DCK is a compelling type of DCK that supports a natural specification of the skeleton of a plan. Unfortunately, most state-of-the-art planners do not have the machinery necessary to exploit procedural DCK. To resolve this deficiency, we propose to compile procedural DCK directly into PDDL2.1, thus enabling any PDDL2.1-compatible planner to exploit it. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, we propose a PDDL-based semantics for an Algol-like, procedural language that can be used to specify DCK in planning. Second, we provide a polynomial algorithm that translates an ADL planning instance and a DCK program, into an equivalent, program-free PDDL2.1 instance whose plans are only those that adhere to the program. Third, we argue that the resulting planning instance is well-suited to being solved by domain-independent heuristic planners. To this end, we propose three approaches to computing domain-independent heuristics for our translated instances, sometimes leveraging properties of our translation to guide search. In our experiments on familiar PDDL planning benchmarks we show that the proposed compilation of procedural DCK can significantly speed up the performance of a heuristic search planner. Our translators are implemented and available on the web.

[1]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  GOLOG: A Logic Programming Language for Dynamic Domains , 1997, J. Log. Program..

[2]  Gerhard Lakemeyer,et al.  Towards an Integration of Golog and Planning , 2007, IJCAI.

[3]  Jorge A. Baier,et al.  Exploiting Procedural Domain Control Knowledge in State-ofthe-Art Planners ( extended version ) , 2008 .

[4]  Marco Pistore,et al.  Planning with a language for extended goals , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

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

[6]  Mark Abramson,et al.  Executing Reactive, Model-based Programs through Graph-based Temporal Planning , 2001, IJCAI.

[7]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  Planning for temporally extended goals , 1996, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Patrick Doherty,et al.  TALplanner: A temporal logic based forward chaining planner , 2001, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[9]  Jussi Rintanen,et al.  Incorporation of Temporal Logic Control into Plan Operators , 2000, ECAI.

[10]  Jorge A. Baier,et al.  Planning with First-Order Temporally Extended Goals using Heuristic Search , 2006, AAAI.

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

[12]  Hector Muñoz-Avila,et al.  SHOP: Simple Hierarchical Ordered Planner , 1999, IJCAI.

[13]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Planning as heuristic search , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Tran Cao Son,et al.  Domain-dependent knowledge in answer set planning , 2002, TOCL.

[15]  Stephen Cresswell,et al.  Compilation of LTL Goal Formulas into PDDL , 2004, ECAI.

[16]  Stefan Edelkamp,et al.  On the Compilation of Plan Constraints and Preferences , 2006, ICAPS.