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.

Most real-world Planning problems are multi-objective, trying to minimize both the makespan of the solution plan, and some cost of the actions involved in the plan. But most, if not all existing approaches are based on single-objective planners, and use an aggregation of the objectives to remain in the single-objective context. Divide and Evolve (DaE) is an evolutionary planner that won the temporal deterministic satisficing track at the last International Planning Competitions (IPC). Like all Evolutionary Algorithms (EA), it can easily be turned into a Pareto-based Multi-Objective EA. It is however important to validate the resulting algorithm by comparing it with the aggregation approach: this is the goal of this paper. The comparative experiments on a recently proposed benchmark set that are reported here demonstrate the usefulness of going Pareto-based in AI Planning.

All standard AI planners to-date can only handle a single objective, and the only way for them to take into account multiple objectives is by aggregation of the objectives. Furthermore, and in deep contrast with the single objective case, there exists no benchmark problems on which to test the algorithms for multi-objective planning. Divide and Evolve (DAE) is an evolutionary planner that won the (single-objective) deterministic temporal satisficing track in the last International Planning Competition. Even though it uses intensively the classical (and hence single-objective) planner YAHSP, it is possible to turn DAE-YAHSP into a multi-objective evolutionary planner. A tunable benchmark suite for multi-objective planning is first proposed, and the performances of several variants of multi-objective DAE-YAHSP are compared on different instances of this benchmark, hopefully paving the road to further multi-objective competitions in AI planning.

DAEX is a metaheuristic designed to improve the plan quality and the scalability of an encapsulated planning system. DAEX is based on a state decomposition strategy, driven by an evolutionary algorithm, which benefits from the use of a classical planning heuristic to maintain an ordering of atoms within the individuals. The proof of concept is achieved by embedding the domain-independent satisficing YAHSP planner and using the critical path h1 heuristic. Experiments with the resulting algorithm are performed on a selection of IPC benchmarks from classical, cost-based and temporal domains. Under the experimental conditions of the IPC, and in particular with a universal parameter setting common to all domains, DAEYAHSP is compared to the best planner for each type of domain. Results show that DAEYAHSP performs very well both on coverage and quality metrics. It is particularly noticeable that DAEX improves a lot on plan quality when compared to YAHSP, which is known to provide largely suboptimal solutions; making it competitive with state-of-the-art planners. This article gives a full account of the algorithm, reports on the experiments and provides some insights on the algorithm behavior.

The field of automated plan generation has recently significantly advanced. However, while several powerful domainindependent PbP has two variants: PbP.s focusing on speed, and planners have been developed, no one of these PbP.q focusing on plan quality. PbP.s entered the learning clearly outperforms all the others in every known benchmark track of the sixth international planning competition (IPC6), domain. It would then be useful to have a multi-planner system and was the overall winner of this competition track (Fern, that automatically selects and combines the most efficient Khardon and Tadepalli 2008). The paper includes some experimental planner(s) for each given domain.