International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems

PRIMA 2015: PRIMA 2015: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems pp 85-100 | Cite as

Optimizing Long-Running Action Histories in the Situation Calculus Through Search

  • Christopher Ewin
  • Adrian R. Pearce
  • Stavros Vassos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9387)

Abstract

Agents are frequently required to perform numerous, complicated interactions with the environment around them, necessitating complex internal representations that are difficult to reason with. We investigate a new direction for optimizing reasoning about long action sequences. The motivation is that a reasoning system can keep a window of executed actions and simplify them before handling them in the normal way, e.g., by updating the internal knowledge base. Our contributions are: (i) we extend previous work to include sensing and non-deterministic actions; (ii) we introduce a framework for performing heuristic search over the space of action sequence manipulations, which allows a form of disjunctive information; finally, (iii) we provide an offline precomputation strategy. Our approach facilitates determining equivalent sequences that are easier to reason with via a new form of search. We demonstrate the potential of this approach over two common domains.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bacchus, F., Halpern, J.Y., Levesque, H.J.: Reasoning about noisy sensors (and effectors) in the situation calculus. In: Dorst, L., Voorbraak, F., van Lambalgen, M. (eds.) RUR 1995. LNCS, vol. 1093. Springer, Heidelberg (1996) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chrpa, L., McCluskey, T.L., Osborne, H.: Determining redundant actions in sequential plans. In: ICTAI, pp. 484–491 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Giacomo, G., Levesque, H.: An incremental interpreter for high-level programs with sensing. In: Levesque, H., Pirri, F. (eds.) Logical Foundations for Cognitive Agents. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 86–102. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ewin, C., Pearce, A.R., Vassos, S.: Transforming situation calculus action theories for optimised reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 448–457 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Helmert, M.: Domains - ipc-2008, deterministic part (2010). http://ipc.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/Domains (accessed February 13, 2015)
  6. 6.
    Kowalski, R., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. New Gen. Comput. 4(1), 67–95 (1986)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lin, F., Reiter, R.: How to progress a database. Artificial Intelligence 92(1–2), 131–167 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu, Y., Levesque, H.J.: Tractable reasoning with incomplete first-order knowledge in dynamic systems with context-dependent actions. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial intelligence, IJCAI 2005, pp. 522–527 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Löwe, B., Pacuit, E., Witzel, A.: DEL planning and some tractable cases. In: van Ditmarsch, H., Lang, J., Ju, S. (eds.) LORI 2011. LNCS, vol. 6953, pp. 179–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McCarthy, J., Hayes, P.J.: Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. Machine Intelligence 4, 463–502 (1969)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Russell, S., Norving, P.: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, second edn. Prentice Hall (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sardina, S., Vassos, S.: The wumpus world in indigolog: a preliminary report. In: Proceedings the Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Action and Change Workshop at IJCAI (NRAC 2005), pp. 90–95 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scherl, R., Levesque, H.J.: Knowledge, action, and the frame problem. Artificial Intelligence 144(1–2), 1–39 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shanahan, M.: The event calculus explained. In: Veloso, M.M., Wooldridge, M.J. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence Today. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1600, pp. 409–430. Springer, Heidelberg (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thielscher, M.: From situation calculus to fluent calculus: State update axioms as a solution to the inferential frame problem. Artificial Intelligence 111(1–2), 277–299 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thielscher, M.: FLUX: A logic programming method for reasoning agents. Theory and Practice of Logic Programing 5(4–5), 533–565 (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wikipedia: Sokoban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (2015). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokoban (accessed February 13, 2015)
  19. 19.
    Yu, Q., Wen, X., Liu, Y.: Multi-agent epistemic explanatory diagnosis via reasoning about actions. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2013, pp. 1183–1190. AAAI Press (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Ewin
    • 1
  • Adrian R. Pearce
    • 1
  • Stavros Vassos
    • 2
  1. 1.National ICT Australia and Computing & Information SystemsThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Computer, Control, and Management EngineeringSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations