MEvo: a framework for effective macro sets evolution

ABSTRACT In Automated Planning, generating macro-operators (macros) is a well-known reformulation approach that is used to speed-up the planning process. Nowadays, given the number of existing techniques, a large number of macros is already available or can be easily extracted. Most of the macro generation techniques aim for using the same set of generated macros for each planner and every problem instance in a given domain. Although they provide ‘general improvement’, the effect of macros might vary a lot for different planners. Moreover, the impact of macros on structurally different problem instances than the training ones can be potentially very detrimental. Evidently, this limits the exploitation of macros in real-world planning applications, where the structure of problem instances can often change as well as the exploited planning engine can change from time to time. In this paper, we propose the Macro sets Evolution (MEvo) approach. MEvo has been designed for overcoming the aforementioned issues in order to improve the performance of domain-independent planners by dynamically selecting promising macros – taken from a given pool – while solving continuous streams of problem instances. Our extensive empirical study, involving more than 1,000 planning problem instances and 8 state-of-the-art planning engines, demonstrates effectiveness and efficiency of MEvo.

[1]  Enrico Scala,et al.  Plan Repair for Resource Constrained Tasks via Numeric Macro Actions , 2014, ICAPS.

[2]  John Levine,et al.  Learning Macro-Actions for Arbitrary Planners and Domains , 2007, ICAPS.

[3]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  Outer entanglements: a general heuristic technique for improving the efficiency of planning algorithms , 2018, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[4]  Eloisa Vargiu,et al.  Automatic Generation of Macro-Operators from Static Domain Analysis , 2004, ECAI.

[5]  Richard E. Korf,et al.  Macro-Operators: A Weak Method for Learning , 1985, Artif. Intell..

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

[7]  Laurent Siklóssy,et al.  The Role of Preprocessing in Problem Solving Systems , 1977, IJCAI.

[8]  J. Christopher Beck,et al.  Instance-Specific Remodelling of Planning Domains by Adding Macros and Removing Operators , 2013, SARA.

[9]  R. Holte,et al.  Jasper : the Art of Exploration in Greedy Best First Search , 2014 .

[10]  Alfonso Gerevini,et al.  Planning through Automatic Portfolio Configuration: The PbP Approach , 2014, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[11]  Carmel Domshlak,et al.  Red-black planning: A new systematic approach to partial delete relaxation , 2015, Artif. Intell..

[12]  Fernando Fernández,et al.  Learning Predictive Models to Configure Planning Portfolios , 2013 .

[13]  Hector Geffner,et al.  Width and Inference Based Planners: SIW, BFS (f), and PROBE , 2014 .

[14]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  On the Evolution of Planner-Specific Macro Sets , 2017, AI*IA.

[15]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  ASAP: An Automatic Algorithm Selection Approach for Planning , 2014, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools.

[16]  Patrik Haslum,et al.  Block-Structured Plan Deordering , 2012, Australasian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[17]  Andrew Coles,et al.  Online Identification of Useful Macro-Actions for Planning , 2007, ICAPS.

[18]  Jussi Rintanen Engineering Efficient Planners with SAT , 2012, ECAI.

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

[20]  Gerhard Lakemeyer,et al.  Initial Results on Generating Macro Actions from a Plan Database for Planning on Autonomous Mobile Robots , 2017, ICAPS.

[21]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  MUM: A Technique for Maximising the Utility of Macro-operators by Constrained Generation and Use , 2014, ICAPS.

[22]  Silvia Richter,et al.  The LAMA Planner: Guiding Cost-Based Anytime Planning with Landmarks , 2010, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[23]  Stefan Edelkamp,et al.  Automated Planning: Theory and Practice , 2007, Künstliche Intell..

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

[25]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  Generation of macro-operators via investigation of action dependencies in plans , 2010, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[26]  Sergio Jiménez Celorrio,et al.  The deterministic part of the seventh International Planning Competition , 2015, Artif. Intell..

[27]  Jonathan Schaeffer,et al.  Macro-FF: Improving AI Planning with Automatically Learned Macro-Operators , 2005, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[28]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  On the effective configuration of planning domain models , 2015 .

[29]  Steven Minton,et al.  Quantitative Results Concerning the Utility of Explanation-based Learning , 1988, Artif. Intell..

[30]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  Determining Representativeness of Training Plans: A Case of Macro-Operators , 2018, 2018 IEEE 30th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI).

[31]  Lars Kotthoff,et al.  Algorithm Selection for Combinatorial Search Problems: A Survey , 2012, AI Mag..

[32]  Barry O'Sullivan,et al.  ReACTR: Realtime Algorithm Configuration through Tournament Rankings , 2015, IJCAI.

[33]  Kevin Leyton-Brown,et al.  Improved Features for Runtime Prediction of Domain-Independent Planners , 2014, ICAPS.

[34]  J. Rintanen Madagascar : Scalable Planning with SAT , 2014 .

[35]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  Exploiting Block Deordering for Improving Planners Efficiency , 2015, IJCAI.

[36]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  The 2014 International Planning Competition: Progress and Trends , 2015, AI Mag..

[37]  Lukás Chrpa,et al.  On the Online Generation of Effective Macro-Operators , 2015, IJCAI.

[38]  Humbert Fiorino,et al.  Learning Useful Macro-actions for Planning with N-Grams , 2013, 2013 IEEE 25th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.