The development of domain-independent planners This modular approach also supports the use of reformulation within the AI Planning community is leading to and configuration techniques which can automatically "off the shelf" technology that can be used in a reformulate, re-represent or tune the domain model and/or wide range of applications. Moreover, it allows a problem description in order to increase the efficiency of modular approach - in which planners and domain a planner and increase the scope of problems solved. The knowledge are modules of larger software applications idea is to make these techniques to some degree independent - that facilitates substitutions or improvements of domain and planner (that is, applicable to a range of individual modules without changing the of domains and planning engine technologies), and use them rest of the system. This approach also supports the to form a wrapper around a planner, improving its overall use of reformulation and configuration techniques, performance for the domain to which it is applied. Types which transform how a model is represented in order of reformulation include macro-learning [Botea et al., 2005; to improve the efficiency of plan generation. Newton et al., 2007], action schema splitting [Areces et al., In this paper, we investigate how the performance 2014] and entanglements [Chrpa and McCluskey, 2012]: here of planners is affected by domain model configuration.

Linear temporal logic (LTL) is an expressive language that allows specifying temporally extended goals and preferences. A general approach to dealing with general LTL properties in planning is by ``compiling them away''; i.e., in a pre-processing phase, all LTL formulas are converted into simple, non-temporal formulas that can be evaluated in a planning state. This is accomplished by first generating a finite-state automaton for the formula, and then by introducing new fluents that are used to capture all possible runs of the automaton. Unfortunately, current translation approaches are worst-case exponential on the size of the LTL formula. In this paper, we present a polynomial approach to compiling away LTL goals. Our method relies on the exploitation of alternating automata. Since alternating automata are different from non-deterministic automata, our translation technique does not capture all possible runs in a planning state and thus is very different from previous approaches. We prove that our translation is sound and complete, and evaluate it empirically showing that it has strengths and weaknesses. Specifically, we find classes of formulas in which it seems to outperform significantly the current state of the art.

In optimal planning as heuristic search, admissible pruning techniques are paramount. One idea is dominance pruning, identifying states "better than" other states. Prior approaches are limited to simple dominance notions, like "more STRIPS facts true" or "higher resource supply". We apply simulation, well-known in model checking, to compute much more general dominance relations based on comparing transition behavior across states. We do so effectively by expressing state-space simulations through the composition of simulations on orthogonal projections. We show how simulation can be made more powerful by intertwining it with a notion of label dominance. Our experiments show substantial improvements across several IPC benchmark domains.

We consider planning problems for stochastic games with objectives specified by a branching-time logic, called probabilistic computation tree logic (PCTL). This problem has been shown to be undecidable if strategies with perfect recall, i.e., history-dependent, are considered. In this paper, we show that, if restricted to co-safe properties, a subset of PCTL properties capable to specify a wide range of properties in practice including reachability ones, the problem turns to be decidable, even when the class of general strategies is considered. We also give an algorithm for solving robust stochastic planning, where a winning strategy is tolerant to some perturbations of probabilities in the model. Our result indicates that satisfiability of co-safe PCTL is decidable as well.

The paper faces the problem of plan repair in presence of numeric information, by providing a new method for the intelligent selection of numeric macro actions. The method relies on a generalization of deordering, extended with new conditions accounting for dependencies and threats implied by the numeric components. The deordering is used as a means to infer (hopefully) minimal ordering constraints then used to extract independent and informative macro actions. Each macro aims at compactly representing a sub-solution for the overall planning problem. To verify the feasibility of the approach, the paper reports experiments in various domains from the International Planning Competition% measuring the performance of the new strategy using two state of the art numeric planning systems; i.e., Colin Metric-FF. Results show (i) the competitiveness of the strategy in terms of coverage, time and quality of the resulting plans wrt current approaches, and (ii) the actual independence from the planner employed.

This work compares two actions' concurrency and co-occurrence employed in temporal modeling languages, one with a PDDL-style action modeling languages used by the AI planning community, exclusion mechanism, and another with an explicit and argue that they explain why MILP or SMT have notion of resources, and investigates their seemed unattractive. Specifically, we observe that PDDL 2.1 implications on constraint-based search. The first [Fox and Long, 2003] induces temporal gaps between consecutive mechanism forces temporal gaps in action schedules interdependent actions, and these gaps often induce and have a high performance penalty. The second twice the number of steps in the plans than what is necessary, mechanism avoids the gaps, with dramatically with strong negative performance implications. The gaps are improved performance.

Recent work in portfolios of problem solvers has shown their ability to outperform single-algorithm approaches in some tasks (e.g. SAT or Automated Planning). However, not much work has been devoted to a better understanding of the relationship between the order of the component solvers and the performance of the resulting portfolio over time. We propose to sort the component solvers in a sequential portfolio, such that the resulting ordered portfolio maximizes the probability of providing the largest performance at any point in time. We empirically show that our greedy approach efficiently obtains near-optimal performance over time. Also, it generalizes much better than an optimal approach which has been observed to suffer from overfitting.

Real world temporal planning often involves dealing with uncertainty about the duration of actions. In this paper, we describe a sound-and-complete compilation technique for strong planning that reduces any planning instance with uncertainty in the duration of actions to a plain temporal planning problem without uncertainty. We evaluate our technique by comparing it with a recent technique for PDDL domains with temporal uncertainty. The experimental results demonstrate the practical applicability of our approach and show complementary behavior with respect to previous techniques. We also demonstrate the high expressiveness of the translation by applying it to a significant fragment of the ANML language.

The Atari 2600 games supported in the Arcade Learning Environment [Bellemare et al., 2013] all feature a known initial (RAM) state and actions that have deterministic effects. Classical planners, however, cannot be used off-the-shelf as there is no compact PDDL-model of the games, and action effects and goals are not known a priori. Indeed, there are no explicit goals, and the planner must select actions on line while interacting with a simulator that returns successor states and rewards. None of this precludes the use of blind lookahead algorithms for action selection like breadth-first search or Dijkstra’s yet such methods are not effective over large state spaces. We thus turn to a different class of planning methods introduced recently that have been shown to be effective for solving large planning problems but which do not require prior knowledge of state transitions, costs (rewards) or goals. The empirical results over 54 Atari games show that the simplest such algorithm performs at the level of UCT, the state-of-the-art planning method in this domain, and suggest the potential of width-based methods for planning with simulators when factored, compact action models are not available.

The use of expressive logical axioms to specify derived predicates often allows planning domains to be formulated more compactly and naturally. We consider axioms in the form of a logic program with recursively defined predicates and negation-as-failure, as in PDDL 2.2. We show that problem formulations with axioms are not only more elegant, but can also be easier to solve, because specifying indirect action effects via axioms removes unnecessary choices from the search space of the planner. Despite their potential, however, axioms are not widely supported, particularly by cost-optimal planners. We draw on the connection between planning axioms and answer set programming to derive a consistency-based relaxation, from which we obtain axiom-aware versions of several admissible planning heuristics, such as hmax and pattern database heuristics.