Causal Belief Decomposition for Planning with Sensing: Completeness Results and Practical Approximation

Belief tracking is a basic problem in planning with sensing. While the problem is intractable, it has been recently shown that for both deterministic and non-deterministic systems expressed in compact form, it can be done in time and space that are exponential in the problem width. The width measures the maximum number of state variables that are all relevant to a given precondition or goal. In this work, we extend this result both theoretically and practically. First, we introduce an alternative decomposition scheme and algorithm with the same time complexity but different completeness guarantees, whose space complexity is much smaller: exponential in the causal width of the problem that measures the number of state variables that are causally relevant to a given precondition, goal, or observable. Second, we introduce a fast, meaningful, and powerful approximation that trades completeness by speed, and is both time and space exponential in the problem causal width. It is then shown empirically that the algorithm combined with simple heuristics yields state-of-the-art real-time performance in domains with high widths but low causal widths such as Minesweeper, Battleship, and Wumpus.

[1]  Enrico Pontelli,et al.  On the Effectiveness of CNF and DNF Representations in Contingent Planning , 2011, IJCAI.

[2]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

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

[4]  Eyal Amir,et al.  Logical Filtering , 2003, IJCAI.

[5]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Width and Complexity of Belief Tracking in Non-Deterministic Conformant and Contingent Planning , 2012, AAAI.

[6]  Iris van Rooij,et al.  Minesweeper May Not Be NP-Complete but Is Hard Nonetheless , 2011 .

[7]  Hector Geffner,et al.  Planning under Partial Observability by Classical Replanning: Theory and Experiments , 2011, IJCAI.

[8]  Csaba Szepesvári,et al.  Bandit Based Monte-Carlo Planning , 2006, ECML.

[9]  Peter van Beek,et al.  Local and Global Relational Consistency , 1995, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Joel Veness,et al.  Monte-Carlo Planning in Large POMDPs , 2010, NIPS.

[11]  Hector Geffner,et al.  A Translation-Based Approach to Contingent Planning , 2009, IJCAI.

[12]  Hector Geffner,et al.  Compiling Uncertainty Away in Conformant Planning Problems with Bounded Width , 2009, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[13]  Guy Shani,et al.  A Multi-Path Compilation Approach to Contingent Planning , 2012, AAAI.

[14]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems , 1988 .

[15]  Olivier Buffet,et al.  Optimistic Heuristics for MineSweeper , 2013 .

[16]  R. Kaye Minesweeper is NP-complete , 2000 .

[17]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems - networks of plausible inference , 1991, Morgan Kaufmann series in representation and reasoning.

[18]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  A Knowledge Compilation Map , 2002, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[19]  Nando de Freitas,et al.  Rao-Blackwellised Particle Filtering for Dynamic Bayesian Networks , 2000, UAI.