In research of manufacturing systems and autonomous robots, the term capability is used for a machine-interpretable specification of a system function. Approaches in this research area develop information models that capture all information relevant to interpret the requirements, effects and behavior of functions. These approaches are intended to overcome the heterogeneity resulting from the various types of processes and from the large number of different vendors. However, these models and associated methods do not offer solutions for automated process planning, i.e. finding a sequence of individual capabilities required to manufacture a certain product or to accomplish a mission using autonomous robots. Instead, this is a typical task for AI planning approaches, which unfortunately require a high effort to create the respective planning problem descriptions. In this paper, we present an approach that combines these two topics: Starting from a semantic capability model, an AI planning problem is automatically generated. The planning problem is encoded using Satisfiability Modulo Theories and uses an existing solver to find valid capability sequences including required parameter values. The approach also offers possibilities to integrate existing human expertise and to provide explanations for human operators in order to help understand planning decisions.

More than two dozen artificial intelligence experts from business and academia, including Texas McCombs, explored the importance of understanding how machine learning systems arrive at their conclusions so humans can trust those results. This relatively new frontier of explainable AI, or XAI, was scrutinized for two half-day sessions in November during the online Global Analytics Summit held by the McCombs Center for Analytics and Transformative Technologies (CATT). More than 3,500 people registered for the conference, another step in the university's drive to be a thought leader in the field. Experts say that as AI systems become more sophisticated, they become increasingly difficult for humans to interpret. The calculation process turns into what is called a "black box" that even data scientists who create the algorithms can't understand, according to IBM Corp. XAI methods, however, provide transparency so humans can understand the results and assess their accuracy and fairness.

In automated planning, the need for explanations arises when there is a mismatch between a proposed plan and the user’s expectation. We frame Explainable AI Planning as an iterative plan exploration process, in which the user asks a succession of contrastive questions that lead to the generation and solution of hypothetical planning problems that are restrictions of the original problem. The object of the exploration is for the user to understand the constraints that govern the original plan and, ultimately, to arrive at a satisfactory plan. We present the results of a user study that demonstrates that when users ask questions about plans, those questions are usually contrastive, i.e. “why A rather than B?”. We use the data from this study to construct a taxonomy of user questions that often arise during plan exploration. Our approach to iterative plan exploration is a process of successive model restriction. Each contrastive user question imposes a set of constraints on the planning problem, leading to the construction of a new hypothetical planning problem as a restriction of the original. Solving this restricted problem results in a plan that can be compared with the original plan, admitting a contrastive explanation. We formally define model-based compilations in PDDL2.1 for each type of constraint derived from a contrastive user question in the taxonomy, and empirically evaluate the compilations in terms of computational complexity. The compilations were implemented as part of an explanation framework supporting iterative model restriction. We demonstrate its benefits in a second user study.

In automated planning, the need for explanations arises when there is a mismatch between a proposed plan and the user's expectation. We frame Explainable AI Planning in the context of the plan negotiation problem, in which a succession of hypothetical planning problems are generated and solved. The object of the negotiation is for the user to understand and ultimately arrive at a satisfactory plan. We present the results of a user study that demonstrates that when users ask questions about plans, those questions are contrastive, i.e. "why A rather than B?". We use the data from this study to construct a taxonomy of user questions that often arise during plan negotiation. We formally define our approach to plan negotiation through model restriction as an iterative process. This approach generates hypothetical problems and contrastive plans by restricting the model through constraints implied by user questions. We formally define model-based compilations in PDDL2.1 of each constraint derived from a user question in the taxonomy, and empirically evaluate the compilations in terms of computational complexity. The compilations were implemented as part of an explanation framework that employs iterative model restriction. We demonstrate its benefits in a second user study.

We present a novel approach for decreasing state uncertainty in planning prior to solving the planning problem. This is done by making predictions about the state based on currently known information, using machine learning techniques. For domains where uncertainty is high, we define an active learning process for identifying which information, once sensed, will best improve the accuracy of predictions. We demonstrate that an agent is able to solve problems with uncertainties in the state with less planning effort compared to standard planning techniques. Moreover, agents can solve problems for which they could not find valid plans without using predictions. Experimental results also demonstrate that using our active learning process for identifying information to be sensed leads to gathering information that improves the prediction process.

CASP is an extension of ASP that allows for numerical constraints to be added in the rules. PDDL+ is an extension of the PDDL standard language of automated planning for modeling mixed discrete-continuous dynamics. In this paper, we present CASP solutions for dealing with PDDL+ problems, i.e., encoding from PDDL+ to CASP, and extensions to the algorithm of the EZCSP CASP solver in order to solve CASP programs arising from PDDL+ domains. An experimental analysis, performed on well-known linear and non-linear variants of PDDL+ domains, involving various configurations of the EZCSP solver, other CASP solvers, and PDDL+ planners, shows the viability of our solution.

In this paper we look into the problem of planning over hybrid domains, where change can be both discrete and instantaneous, or continuous over time. In addition, it is required that each state on the trajectory induced by the execution of plans complies with a given set of global constraints. We approach the computation of plans for such domains as the problem of searching over a deterministic state model. In this model, some of the successor states are obtained by solving numerically the so-called initial value problem over a set of ordinary differential equations (ODE) given by the current plan prefix. These equations hold over time intervals whose duration is determined dynamically, according to whether zero crossing events take place for a set of invariant conditions. The resulting planner, FS+, incorporates these features together with effective heuristic guidance. FS+ does not impose any of the syntactic restrictions on process effects often found on the existing literature on Hybrid Planning. A key concept of our approach is that a clear separation is struck between planning and simulation time steps. The former is the time allowed to observe the evolution of a given dynamical system before committing to a future course of action, whilst the later is part of the model of the environment. FS+ is shown to be a robust planner over a diverse set of hybrid domains, taken from the existing literature on hybrid planning and systems.

The introduction of PDDL+ allowed more accurate representations of complex real-world problems of interest to the scientific community. However, PDDL+ problems are notoriously challenging to planners, requiring more advanced heuristics. We introduce the Temporal Pattern Database (TPDB), a new domain-independent heuristic technique designed for PDDL+ domains with mixed discrete/continuous behaviour, non-linear system dynamics, processes, and events. The pattern in the TPDB is obtained through an abstraction based on time and state discretisation. Our approach combines constraint relaxation and abstraction techniques, and uses solutions to the relaxed problem, as a guide to solving the concrete problem with a discretisation fine enough to satisfy the continuous model's constraints.

Planning in hybrid systems has been gaining research interest in the Artificial Intelligence community in recent years. Hybrid systems allow for a more accurate representation of real world problems, though solving them is very challenging due to complex system dynamics and a large model feature set. We developed DiNo, a new planner designed to tackle problems set in hybrid domains.DiNo is based on the discretise and validate approach and uses the novel Staged Relaxed Planning Graph+ (SRPG+) heuristic.

Planning with hybrid domains modelled in PDDL+ has been gaining research interest in the Automated Planning community in recent years. Hybrid domain models capture a more accurate representation of real world problems that involve continuous processes than is possible using discrete systems. However, solving problems represented as PDDL+ domains is very challenging due to the construction of complex system dynamics, including non-linear processes and events. In this paper we introduce DiNo, a new planner capable of tackling complex problems with non-linear system dynamics governing the continuous evolution of states. DiNo is based on the discretise-and-validate approach and uses the novel Staged Relaxed Planning Graph+ (SRPG+) heuristic, which is introduced in this paper. Although several planners have been developed to work with subsets of PDDL+ features, or restricted forms of processes, DiNo is currently the only heuristic planner capable of handling non-linear system dynamics combined with the full PDDL+ feature set.