Capability Models and Their Applications in Planning

One important challenge for a set of agents to achieve more efficient collaboration is for these agents to maintain proper models of each other. An important aspect of these models of other agents is that they are often not provided, and hence must be learned from plan execution traces. As a result, these models of other agents are inherently partial and incomplete. Most existing agent models are based on action modeling and do not naturally allow for incompleteness. In this paper, we introduce a new and inherently incomplete modeling approach based on the representation of capabilities, which has several unique advantages. First, we show that the structures of capability models can be learned or easily specified, and both model structure and parameter learning are robust to high degrees of incompleteness in plan traces (e.g., with only start and end states partially observed). Furthermore, parameter learning can be performed efficiently online via Bayesian learning. While high degrees of incompleteness in plan traces presents learning challenges for traditional (complete) models, capability models can still learn to extract useful information. As a result, capability models are useful in applications in which traditional models are difficult to obtain, or models must be learned from incomplete plan traces, e.g., robots learning human models from observations and interactions. Furthermore, we discuss using capability models for single agent planning, and then extend it to multi-agent planning (with each agent modeled separately by a capability model), in which the capability models of agents are used by a centralized planner. The limitation, however, is that the synthesized "plans" (called c-plans) are incomplete, i.e., there may or may not be a complete plan for a c-plan. This is, however, unavoidable for planning using partial and incomplete models (e.g., considering planning using action models learned from partial and noisy plan traces).

[1]  Stuart J. Russell,et al.  Angelic Semantics for High-Level Actions , 2007, ICAPS.

[2]  E. Soloway,et al.  Causal Model Progressions as a Foundation for Intelligent Learning Environments , 1990 .

[3]  Hector Muñoz-Avila,et al.  Learning hierarchical task network domains from partially observed plan traces , 2014, Artif. Intell..

[4]  Changhe Yuan,et al.  Learning Optimal Bayesian Networks: A Shortest Path Perspective , 2013, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[5]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Reinforcement Learning: A Survey , 1996, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[6]  Richard E. Neapolitan,et al.  Learning Bayesian networks , 2007, KDD '07.

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

[8]  Matthias Scheutz,et al.  Coordination in human-robot teams using mental modeling and plan recognition , 2014, 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

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

[10]  Doina Precup,et al.  Between MDPs and Semi-MDPs: A Framework for Temporal Abstraction in Reinforcement Learning , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[11]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Design and Synthesis of Synchronization Skeletons Using Branching-Time Temporal Logic , 1981, Logic of Programs.

[12]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  A Heuristic Approach to Planning with Incomplete STRIPS Action Models , 2014, ICAPS.

[13]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Model-lite Planning for the Web Age Masses: The Challenges of Planning with Incomplete and Evolving Domain Models , 2007, AAAI.

[14]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Synthesizing Robust Plans under Incomplete Domain Models , 2011, NIPS.

[15]  Maurice Pagnucco,et al.  A Framework for Task Planning in Heterogeneous Multi Robot Systems Based on Robot Capabilities , 2014, AAAI.

[16]  Lin Padgham,et al.  Formalisations of Capabilities for BDI-Agents , 2005, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[17]  James A. Hendler,et al.  HTN Planning: Complexity and Expressivity , 1994, AAAI.

[18]  Martin L. Puterman,et al.  Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming , 1994 .

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

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

[21]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Automated Planning for Peer-to-peer Teaming and its Evaluation in Remote Human-Robot Interaction , 2015, HRI.

[22]  Prashant Doshi,et al.  Interactive POMDPs: properties and preliminary results , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[23]  Moshe Y. Vardi An Automata-Theoretic Approach to Linear Temporal Logic , 1996, Banff Higher Order Workshop.

[24]  Lise Getoor,et al.  Learning Probabilistic Relational Models , 1999, IJCAI.

[25]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Action-Model Acquisition from Noisy Plan Traces , 2013, IJCAI.

[26]  Shlomo Zilberstein,et al.  Memory-Bounded Dynamic Programming for DEC-POMDPs , 2007, IJCAI.