Replanning in a Resource-Based Framework

  • Roman van der Krogt
  • André Bos
  • Cees Witteveen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2322)


An important aspect of agents is how they construct a plan to reach their goals. Since most agents live in a dynamic environment, they also will often be confronted with situations in which the plans they constructed to reach their goals are no longer feasible. In such situations, agents have to change their plan to deal with the new environment. In this paper we describe such a replanning process using a computational framework, consisting of resources and actions to represent the planned activities of an agent.


Plan Scheme Input Resource Current Plan Partial Plan Ground Instance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J.L. Ambite and C.A. Knoblock. Planning by rewriting: Effiently generating high-quality plans. In Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-97), pages 706–713, Providence, Rhode Island, 1997. AAAI Press/MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A.L. Blum and M.L. Furst. Fast planning through planning graph analysis. Artificial Intelligence, 90:281–300, 1997.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M.M. de Weerdt, A. Bos, H. Tonino, and C. Witteveen. A resource logic for multi-agent plan merging. Submitted to the Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Doherty and J. Kvarnstrom. Talplanner: An empirical inverstigation of a temporal logicbased forward chaining planner, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Gerevini and I. Serina. Fast plan adaptation through planning graphs: Local and systematic search techniques. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems (AIPS-00), pages 112–121, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Hanks and D.S. Weld. A domain-independent algorithm for plan adaptation. Journal of AI Research, 2:319–360, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Hoffmann and B. Nebel. Fast plan generation trough heuristic search, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Kambhampati. A theory of plan modification. In Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), pages 176–182, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 1990. AAAI Press/MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Kautz and B. Selman. BLACKBOX: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. In Working notes of the workshop on planning as combinatorial search, held in conjunction with AIPS’98, Pittsburgh, PA, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Kott and V. Saks. Continuity-guided regeneration: An approach to reactive replanning and rescheduling. In Proceedings of the Florida AI Research Symposium, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    N. Onder. Contingency Selection in Plan Generation. PhD thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Pryor and G. Collins. Planning for contingencies: A decision-based approach. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 4:287–339, 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R.P.J. van der Krogt. Replanning methods in a skill-based framework. Master’s thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, August 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D.S. Weld. Recent advances in AI planning. AI Magazine, 20(2):93–123, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roman van der Krogt
    • 1
  • André Bos
    • 1
  • Cees Witteveen
    • 1
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations