Timeline-based planning is a paradigm that models temporal planning domains as sets of independent, but interacting, components. The behavior of the components can be described by means of a number of state variables whose evolution and interactions over time are governed by a set of temporal constraints. This paradigm is different from the one underlying the common action-based formalisms, such as PDDL, where the focus is on what can be done by an executive agent. Although successfully used in many real-world applications, little work has been done on the expressiveness and complexity of the timeline-based formalism. The present paper provides a characterization of the complexity of non-flexible timeline-based planning, by proving that a general formulation of the problem is EXPSPACE-complete. Such a result extends a previous work where the same complexity bound was proved for a restricted fragment of timeline-based planning that was shown to be expressive enough to capture action-based temporal planning. In addition, we prove that requiring an upper bound to the solution horizon as part of the input decreases the complexity of the problem, that becomes NEXPTIME-complete.

The plans that planning systems generate for solvable planning tasks are routinely verified by independent validation tools. For unsolvable planning tasks, no such validation capabilities currently exist. We describe a family of certificates of unsolvability for classical planning tasks that can be efficiently verified and are sufficiently general for a wide range of planning approaches including heuristic search with delete relaxation, critical-path, pattern database and linear merge-and-shrink heuristics, symbolic search with binary decision diagrams, and the Trapper algorithm for detecting dead ends. We also augmented a classical planning system with the ability to emit certificates of unsolvability and implemented a planner-independent certificate validation tool. Experiments show that the overhead for producing such certificates is tolerable and that their validation is practically feasible.

When minimizing makespan during off-line planning, the fastest action sequence to reach a particular state is, by definition, preferred. When trying to reach a goal quickly in on-line planning, previous work has inherited that assumption: the faster of two paths that both reach the same state is usually considered to dominate the slower one. In this short paper, we point out that, when planning happens concurrently with execution, selecting a slower action can allow additional time for planning, leading to better plans. We present Slo'RTS, a metareasoning planning algorithm that estimates whether the expected improvement in future decision-making from this increased planning time is enough to make up for the increased duration of the selected action. Using simple benchmarks, we show that Slo'RTS can yield shorter time-to-goal than a conventional planner. This generalizes previous work on metareasoning in on-line planning and highlights the inherent uncertainty present in an on-line setting.

When planning in temporal domains with required concurrency, envelopes arise where one or more actions need to occur within the execution of another. Starting an envelope action gives rise to an implicit relative deadline: all of the actions that need to occur within the envelope must complete before it ends. Finding effective heuristic guidance in these domains is challenging: the heuristic must not only consider how to reach the goals, but identify when it is not possible to achieve these implicit deadlines to avoid fruitless search. In this paper, we present an adaptation of a Temporal Relaxed Planning Graph heuristic, that accounts for dependencies between facts and actions in the relaxed planning graph; and the envelopes that are open in the state being evaluated. Results show that our new heuristic significantly improves the performance of a temporal planner on benchmark domains with required concurrency.

Partially observable planning is one of the most general and useful models for dealing with complex problems. In recent years there have been significant progress on the development of planners for deterministic models that offer strong theoretical guarantees over certain subclasses of tasks. These guarantees however are difficult to establish as they often involve reasoning about features that are specific to the planner and subclass of tasks. In this paper we develop a formal framework for reasoning about online planning over deterministic tasks, identify a set of general conditions that are sufficient to guarantee completeness, and obtain novel and simple planners that are complete over non-trivial and interesting classes of tasks. Building on top state-of-the-art online planners, we implement some of our ideas and make a comparison with a state-of-the-art online planner.

Most applications of planning to real problems involve complex and often non-linear equations, including matrix operations. PDDL is ill-suited to express such calculations since it only allows basic operations between numeric fluents. To remedy this restriction, a generic PDDL planner can be connected to a specialised advisor, which equips the planner with the ability to carry out sophisticated mathematical operations. Unlike related techniques based on semantic attachment, our planner is able to exploit an approximation of the numeric information calculated by the advisor to compute informative heuristic estimators. Guided by both causal and numeric information, our planning framework outperforms traditional approaches, especially against problems with numeric goals. We provide evidence of the power of our solution by successfully solving four completely different problems.

Plan-Verification is the task of determining whether a plan is a solution to a given planning problem. Any plan verifier has, apart from showing that verifying plans is possible in practice, a wide range of possible applications. These include mixed-initiative planning, where a user is integrated into the planning process, and local search, e.g., for post-optimising plans or for plan repair. In addition to its practical interest, plan verification is also a problem worth investigating for theoretical reasons. Recent work showed plan verification for hierarchical planning problems to be NP-complete, as opposed to classical planning where it is in P. As such, plan verification for hierarchical planning problem was — until now — not possible. We describe the first plan verifier for hierarchical planning. It uses a translation of the problem into a SAT formula. Further we conduct an empirical evaluation, showing that the correct output is produced within acceptable time.

We investigate compositional bounding of transition system diameters, with application in bounding the lengths of plans. We establish usefully-tight bounds by exploiting acyclicity in state-spaces. We provide mechanised proofs in HOL4 of the validity of our approach. Evaluating our bounds in a range of benchmarks, we demonstrate exponentially tighter upper bounds compared to existing methods. Treating both solvable and unsolvable benchmark problems, we also demonstrate the utility of our bounds in boosting planner performance. We enhance an existing planning procedure to use our bounds, and demonstrate significant coverage improvements, both compared to the base planner, and also in comparisons with state-of-the-art systems.

Cost partitioning is a general method for adding multiple heuristic values admissibly. In the setting of optimal classical planning, saturated cost partitioning has recently been shown to be the cost partitioning algorithm of choice for pattern database heuristics found by hill climbing, systematic pattern database heuristics and Cartesian abstraction heuristics. To evaluate the synergy of the three heuristic types, we compute the saturated cost partitioning over the combined sets of heuristics and observe that the resulting heuristic is outperformed by the heuristic that simply maximizes over the three saturated cost partitioning heuristics computed separately for each heuristic type. Our new algorithm for choosing the orders in which saturated cost partitioning considers the heuristics allows us to compute heuristics outperforming not only the maximizing heuristic but even state-of-the-art planners.

The separation of planner logic from domain knowledge supports the use of reformulation and configuration techniques, such as macro-actions and entanglements, which transform the model representation in order to improve a planner's performance. One drawback of such an approach is that it may require a potentially expensive training phase. In this paper, we introduce heuristic approaches for the online configuration of planning domain models. The proposed heuristics consider different aspects of PDDL-encoded operators for reordering such operators in the domain model, relying on the assumption that the way in which operators are encoded carries useful information about their expected use.