Real-Time Systems

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 317–347

A survey of research in deliberative real-time artificial intelligence

Invited paper
  • Alan Garvey
  • Victor Lesser
Article
  • 115 Downloads

Abstract

This paper surveys recent research in deliberative real-time artificial intelligence (AI). Major areas of study have beenanytime algorithms, approximate processing, and large system architectures. We describe several systems in each of these areas, focusing both on progress within the field, and the costs, benefits and interactions among different problem and algorithm complexity limitations used in the surveyed work.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Philip E. Agre and David Chapman. Pengi: An implementation of a theory of activity. InProceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 268–272, Seattle, WA, July 1987.Google Scholar
  2. D. Ash, G. Gold, A. Seiver, and B. Hayes-Roth. Guaranteeing real-time response with limited resources.Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 5:49–66, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. David Ash and Barbara Hayes-Roth. A comparison of action-based hierarchies and decision trees for real-time performance. InProceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 568–573, Washington, D.C., July 1993.Google Scholar
  4. Mark Boddy. Solving time-dependent problems: A decision-theoretic approach to planning in dynamic environments. Ph.D. Dissertation CS-91-06, Department of Computer Science, Brown University, Providence, RI, 1991.Google Scholar
  5. Mark Boddy and Thomas Dean. Solving time-dependent planning problems. InProceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, MI, August 1989.Google Scholar
  6. Mark Boddy and Thomas Dean. Deliberation scheduling for problem solving in time-constrained environments.Artificial Intelligence, 1994. To appear.Google Scholar
  7. Piero P. Bonissone and Peter C. Halverson. Time-constrained reasoning under uncertainty.The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 2(1/2):25–45, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. Rodney A. Brooks. A robust layered control system for a mobile robot.IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, RA-2(1):14–23, March 1986.Google Scholar
  9. J. Y. Chung, J. W. S. Liu, and K. J. Lin. Scheduling periodic jobs that allow imprecise results.IEEE Transactions on Computers, 39:1156–1173, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. Anne Collinot and Barbara Hayes-Roth. Real-time control of reasoning: Experiments with two control models. InProceedings of the Workshop on Innovative Approaches to Planning, Scheduling and Control, pages 263–270, November 1990.Google Scholar
  11. G. F. Cooper. The computational complexity of probabilistic inference using Bayesian belief networks.Artificial Intelligence, 42(2/3):393, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. Bruce D'Ambrosio. Resource bounded-agents in an uncertain world. InProceedings of the Workshop on Real-Time Artificial Intelligence Problems, IJCAI-89, Detroit, August 1989.Google Scholar
  13. T. Dean and M. Boddy. An analysis of time-dependent planning. InProceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 49–54, St. Paul, Minnesota, August 1988.Google Scholar
  14. Thomas Dean and Michael Wellman.Planning and Control. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. Keith S. Decker, Alan J. Garvey, Marty A. Humphrey, and Victor R. Lesser. A real-time control architecture for an approximate processing blackboard system.International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 7(2):265–284, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. Keith S. Decker and Victor R. Lesser. Quantitative modeling of complex computational task environments. InProceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 217–224, Washington, July 1993.Google Scholar
  17. Keith S. Decker, Victor R. Lesser, and Robert C. Whitehair. Extending a blackboard architecture for approximate processing.The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 2(1/2):47–79, 1990.Google Scholar
  18. J.K. Dey, James Kurose, and Don Towsley. On-line processor scheduling for a class of IRIS (increasing reward with increasing time) real-time tasks. CS Technical Report 93–09, University of Massachusetts, 1993.Google Scholar
  19. Oren Etzioni. Embedding decision-analytic control in a learning architecture.Artificial Intelligence, 49:129–159, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. R. James Firby. An investigation into reactive planning in complex domains. InProceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 202–206, Seattle, WA, July 1987.Google Scholar
  21. Alan Garvey, Marty Humphrey, and Victor Lesser. Task interdependencies in design-to-time real-time scheduling. InProceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 580–585, Washington, D.C., July 1993.Google Scholar
  22. Alan Garvey and Victor Lesser. Design-to-time real-time scheduling.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 23(6), 1993.Google Scholar
  23. B. Hayes-Roth, R. Washington, D. Ash, A. Collinot, A. Vina, and A. Seiver. Guardian: A prototype intensive-care monitoring agent.Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 4:165–185, 1992.Google Scholar
  24. Barbara Hayes-Roth. Architectural foundations for real-time performance in intelligent agents.The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 2(1/2):99–125, 1990.Google Scholar
  25. Barbara Hayes-Roth and Anne Collinot. Scalability of real-time reasoning in intelligent agents. Technical Report KSL 91–08, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, 1991.Google Scholar
  26. James Hendler and Ashok Agrawala. Mission critical planning: AI on the MARUTI real-time operating system. InProceedings of the Workshop on Innovative Approaches to Planning, Scheduling and Control, pages 77–84, November 1990.Google Scholar
  27. Kevin I-J. Ho, Joseph Y-T. Leung, and W-D. Wei. Scheduling imprecise computation tasks with 0/1-constraint. Technical Report UNL-CSE-92-16, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 1992.Google Scholar
  28. Eric J. Horvitz. Reasoning under varying and uncertain resource constraints. InProceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 111–116, St. Paul, MN, August 1988.Google Scholar
  29. Eric J. Horvitz. Reasoning about beliefs and actions under computational resource constraints. In L. N. Kanal, T. S. Levitt, and J. F. Lemmer, editors,Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence 3. Elsevier Science Publishers, 1989.Google Scholar
  30. Eric J. Horvitz and John S. Breese. Ideal partition of resources for metareasoning. Technical report KSL-90-26, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, March 1990.Google Scholar
  31. Eric J. Horvitz, Gregory F. Cooper, and David E. Heckerman. Reflection and action under scarce resources: Theoretical principles and empirical study. InProceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1121–1127, Detroit, MI, August 1989.Google Scholar
  32. Eric J. Horvitz and Geoffrey Rutledge. Time-dependent utility and action under uncertainty. InProceedings of the Sixth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, CA, July 1991.Google Scholar
  33. Adele E. Howe, David M. Hart, and Paul R. Cohen. Addressing real-time constraints in the design of autonomous agents.The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 2(1/2):81–97, 1990.Google Scholar
  34. F. F. Ingrand and M. P. Georgeff. Managing deliberation and reasoning in real-time AI systems. InProceedings of the Workshop on Innovative Approaches to Planning, Scheduling and Control, pages 284–291, November 1990.Google Scholar
  35. Francois F. Ingrand, Michael P. Georgeff, and Anand S. Rao. An architecture for real-time reasoning and system control.IEEE Expert, pages 34–44, December 1992.Google Scholar
  36. E. Douglas Jensen, C. Douglass Locke, and Hideyuki Tokuda. A time-driven scheduling model for real-time operating systems. InProceedings of the 1985 Real-time Systems Symposium, pages 112–122, December 1985.Google Scholar
  37. Kevin B. Kenny and Kwei-Jay Lin. Building flexible real-time systems using the Flex language.IEEE Computer, 24(5):70–78, May 1991.Google Scholar
  38. Richard E. Korf. Depth-limited search for real-time problem solving.The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 2(1/2):7–24, 1990.Google Scholar
  39. Jay S. Lark, Lee D. Erman, Stephanie Forrest, Kim P. Gostelow, Frederick Hayes-Roth, and David M. Smith. Concepts, methods, and languages for building timely intelligent systems.The Journal of Real-Time Systems, 2(1/2):127–148, 1990.Google Scholar
  40. Victor R. Lesser and Daniel D. Corkill. The distributed vehicle monitoring testbed.AI Magazine, 4(3):63–109, Fall 1983.Google Scholar
  41. Victor R. Lesser, Jasmina Pavlin, and Edmund Durfee. Approximate processing in real-time problem solving.AI Magazine, 9(1):49–61, Spring 1988.Google Scholar
  42. Joseph Y-T. Leung, Vincent K.M. Yu, and W-D. Wei. Minimizing the weighted number of tardy task units. Technical report, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 1992.Google Scholar
  43. J. W. S. Liu, K. J. Lin, W. K. Shih, A. C. Yu, J. Y. Chung, and W. Zhao. Algorithms for scheduling imprecise computations. In Andr'e M. van Tilborg and Gary M. Koob, editors,Foundations of Real-Time Computing: Scheduling and Resource Management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991.Google Scholar
  44. J. W. S. Liu, K. J. Lin, W. K. Shih, A. C. Yu, J. Y. Chung, and W. Zhao. Algorithms for scheduling imprecise computations.IEEE Computer, 24(5):58–68, May 1991.Google Scholar
  45. Chris Marlin, Wei Zhao, Graeme Doherty, and Andrew Bohonis. GARTL: A real-time programming language based on multi-version computation. InProceedings of the International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 107–115, New Orleans, LA, March 1990.Google Scholar
  46. David J. Musliner, Edmund H. Durfee, and Kang G. Shin. CIRCA: A cooperative intelligent real-time control architecture.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 23(6), 1993.Google Scholar
  47. Stuart Russell and Eric Wefald.Do the Right Thing: Studies in Limited Rationality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991.Google Scholar
  48. Stuart J. Russell and Shlomo Zilberstein. Composing real-time systems. InProceedings of the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 212–217, Sydney, Australia, August 1991.Google Scholar
  49. Wei-Kuan Shih, Jane W. S. Liu, and Jen-Yao Chung. Algorithms for scheduling imprecise computations with timing constraints.SIAM Journal on Computing, 20(3):537–552, June 1991.Google Scholar
  50. J. A. Stankovic, K. Ramamritham, and D. Niehaus. On using the Spring kernel to support real-time AI applications. InProceedings of the EuroMicro Workshop on Real-time Systems, 1989.Google Scholar
  51. Jay K. Strosnider and C. J. Paul. A structured view of real-time problem solving. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 1993.Google Scholar
  52. Richard Washington and Barbara Hayes-Roth. Input data management in real-time AI systems. InProceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence, pages 250–255, Detroit, MI, August 1989.Google Scholar
  53. W. Zhao, K. Ramamritham, and J. A. Stankovic. Scheduling tasks with resource requirements in hard real-time systems.IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, May 1987.Google Scholar
  54. Shlomo Zilberstein. Operational rationality through compilation of anytime algorithms. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, 1993.Google Scholar
  55. Shlomo Zilberstein and Stuart J. Russell. Constructing utility-driven real-time systems using anytime algorithms. InProceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Imprecise and Approximate Computation, pages 6–10, Phoenix, AZ, December 1992.Google Scholar
  56. Shlomo Zilberstein and Stuart J. Russell. Efficient resource-bounded reasoning in AT-RALPH. InProceedings of the First International Conference on AI Planning Systems, College Park, Maryland, June 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Garvey
    • 1
  • Victor Lesser
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of MassachusettsAmherst

Personalised recommendations