Abstract
There is a trade-off between the generality and efficiency of automatic planning systems which means that general planners tend to be inefficient, the problem of “efficiency versus generality”. Here we present PRECEDE, a novel method of off-line compilation, that analyses domain operators and produces heuristics that reduce search during plan generation. We present a declarative specification of PRECEDE, illustrate it with a worked example and discuss the results of some empirical tests and related work.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
O. Ezioni. Acquiring search-control knowledge via static analysis. Artificial Intelligence, 62, 1993.
T. Bylander. Complexity Results for Planning. In Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1991.
C. Dawson and L. Siklóssy. The Role of Preprocessing in Problem Solving Systems. In Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1977.
M. Drummond and K. Currie. Goal Ordering in Partially Ordered Plans. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1989.
O. Etzioni. Why PRODIGY/EBL Works. In Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1990.
R. E. Fikes and N. J. Nilsson. STRIPS: A New Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving. Artificial Intelligence, 2, 1971.
E. Fink and Q. Yang. Automatically Abstracting the Effects of Operators. In Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems: Proceedings of the First International Conference, 1992.
F. Van Harmelen and A. Bundy. Explanation-Based Generalisation=Partial Evaluation. Artificial Intelligence, 36:401–412, 1988.
K. B. Irani and J. Cheng. Subgoal Ordering and Goal Augmentation for Heuristic Problem Solving. In Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1987.
K. B. Irani and J. Cheng. Ordering Problem Subgoals. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1989.
C. Knoblock. Automatically Generating Abstractions for Problem Solving. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 1991.
V. Lifschitz. On the Semantics of STRIPS. In Proc. 1986 workshop: Reasoning about actions and plans, 1986.
M. A. Perez and O. Ezioni. DYNAMIC: A new role for training problems in EBL. Technical Report CMU-CS-92-124, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 1992.
S. Minton. Quantitative Results concerning the utility of Explanation-Based Learning. In Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 564–569, 1988.
S. Minton, J. G. Carbonell, C. A. Knoblock, D. R. Kuokka, O. Etzioni, and Y. Gill. Explanation-Based Learning: A Problem Solving Perspective. Artificial Intelligence, 40:63–118, 1989.
J. M. Porteous. Compilation-Based Performance Improvement for Generative Planners. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, The City University, 1993.
T. L. McCluskey. Explanation-based and Similarity-Based Learning. In Proceedings of the 4th European Working Session on Learning. Pitman, 1989.
A. Tate. Project Planning Using a Hierarchical Non-linear Planner. Technical Report Department of Artificial Intelligence memo 75, University of Edinburgh, 1977.
D. Wilkins. Practical Planning: Extending the Classical A.I. Paradigm. Addison-Wesley, 1988.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
McCluskey, T.L., Porteous, J.M. (1994). Learning heuristics for ordering plan goals through static operator analysis. In: Raś, Z.W., Zemankova, M. (eds) Methodologies for Intelligent Systems. ISMIS 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 869. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58495-1_41
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58495-1_41
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-58495-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-49010-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive