Searching for Cost-Optimized Strategies: An Agricultural Application

  • Christine Largouet
  • Yulong Zhao
  • Marie-Odile Cordier
Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 250)

Abstract

We consider a system modeled as a set of interacting components evolving along time according to explicit timing constraints. The decision making problem consists in selecting and organizing actions in order to reach a goal state in a limited time and in an optimal manner, assuming actions have a cost. We propose to reformulate the planning problem in terms of model-checking and controller synthesis such that the state to reach is expressed using a temporal logic. We have chosen to represent each agent using the formalism of Priced Timed Game Automata (PTGA) and a set of knowledge. PTGA is an extension of Timed Automata that allows the representation of cost on actions and the definition of a goal (to reach or to avoid). This paper describes two algorithms designed to answer the planning problem on a network of agents and proposes practical implementation using model-checking tools that shows promising results on an agricultural application: a grassland based dairy production system.

Keywords

Decision support system Temporal planning Optimized planning Timed automata Model-checking 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Giunchiglia, F., Traverso, P.: Planning as model checking. In: Biundo, S., Fox, M. (eds.) Recent Advances in AI Planning. LNCS, vol. 1809, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cimatti, A., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Traverso, P.: Weak, strong, and strong cyclic planning via symbolic model checking. Artif. Intell. 147(1–2), 35–84 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cesta, A., Finzi, A., Fratini, S., Orlandini, A., Tronci, E.: Analyzing flexible timeline-based plans. In: ECAI-2010, pp. 471–476 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Orlandini, A., Finzi, A., Cesta, A., Fratini, S.: Tga-based controllers for flexible plan execution. KI 2011, 233–245 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lomuscio, A., Raimondi, F.: Model checking knowledge, strategies, and games in multi-agent systems. In: AAMAS-2006, pp. 161–168 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lomuscio, A., Qu, H., Raimondi, F.: MCMAS: a model checker for the verification of multi-agent systems. In: Bouajjani, A., Maler, O. (eds.) CAV 2009. LNCS, vol. 5643, pp. 682–688. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lomuscio, A., Michaliszyn, J.: Decidability of model checking multi-agent systems against a class of EHS specifications. In: ECAI-2014, pp. 543–548 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang, X., Van der Meyden, R.: Symbolic model checking epistemic strategy logic. In: AAAI-2014, Québec, Canada (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alur, R., Dill, D.: A theory of timed automata. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 126, 183–235 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bouyer, P., Cassez, F., Fleury, E., Larsen, K.G.: Optimal strategies in priced timed game automata. In: Lodaya, K., Mahajan, M. (eds.) FSTTCS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3328, pp. 148–160. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alur, R., La Torre, S., Pappas, G.J.: Optimal paths in weighted timed automata. In: Di Benedetto, M.D., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L. (eds.) HSCC 2001. LNCS, vol. 2034, pp. 49–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Asarin, E., Maler, O., Pnueli, A.: Symbolic controller synthesis for discrete and timed systems. In: Antsaklis, P., Kohn, W., Nerode, A., Sastry, S. (eds.) Hybrid Systems II. LNCS, vol. 999, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henzinger, T., Nicollin, X., Sifakis, J., Yovine, S.: Symbolic model checking for real-time systems. Inf. Comput. 111(2), 193–244 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clarke, E., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.: Model-Checking. MIT Press, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ramadge, P., Wonham, W.: The control of discrete event systems. IEEE 77, 81–98 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alur, R., Courcoubetis, C., Dill, D.L.: Model-checking in dense real-time. Inf. Comput. 104(1), 2–34 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Larsen, K., Pettersson, P., Yi, W.: Uppaal in a nutshell. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 1, 134–152 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Behrmann, G., Cougnard, A., David, A., Fleury, E., Larsen, K.G., Lime, D.: UPPAAL-Tiga: Time for Playing Games! In: Damm, W., Hermanns, H. (eds.) CAV 2007. LNCS, vol. 4590, pp. 121–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Behrmann, G., Larsen, K.G., Rasmussen, J.I.: Priced timed automata: algorithms and applications. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Graf, S., de Roever, W.-P. (eds.) FMCO 2004. LNCS, vol. 3657, pp. 162–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice Hall, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cohen, W.: Fast effective rule induction. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 115–123. Morgan Kaufmann (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christine Largouet
    • 1
  • Yulong Zhao
    • 2
  • Marie-Odile Cordier
    • 2
  1. 1.AGROCAMPUS / IRISARennes CedexFrance
  2. 2.Université de Rennes 1/ IRISARennes CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations