A Non-monotonic Goal Specification Language for Planning with Preferences
This paper introduces a default logic based approach to defining goal specification languages that can be non-monotonic and allow for the specification of inconsistencies and priorities among goals. The paper starts by presenting a basic goal specification language for planning with preferences. It then defines goal default theories (resp. with priorities) by embedding goal formulae into default logic (resp. prioritizing default logic). It is possible to show that the new language is general, as it can express several features of previously developed goal specification languages. The paper discusses how several other features can be subsumed by extending the basic goal specification language. Finally, we identify features that might be important in goal specification that cannot be expressed by our language.
KeywordsTransition System Planning Problem Linear Temporal Logic Basic Goal Default Theory
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Baral, C., Zhao, J.: Goal specification in presence of non-deterministic actions. In: de Mántaras, R.L., Saitta, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th Eureopean Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2004, including Prestigious Applicants of Intelligent Systems, PAIS 2004, Valencia, Spain, August 22-27, pp. 273–277. IOS Press (2004)Google Scholar
- 3.Baral, C., Zhao, J.: Goal specification, non-determinism and quantifying over policies. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-First National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the Eighteenth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, July 16-20, AAAI Press, Boston (2006)Google Scholar
- 4.Baral, C., Zhao, J.: Non-monotonic temporal logics for goal specification. In: Veloso, M.M. (ed.) IJCAI 2007, Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, India, January 6-12, pp. 236–242 (2007)Google Scholar
- 5.Baral, C., Zhao, J.: Non-monotonic temporal logics that facilitate elaboration tolerant revision of goals. In: Fox, D., Gomes, C.P. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2008, Chicago, Illinois, July 13-17, pp. 406–411. AAAI Press (2008)Google Scholar
- 6.Bienvenu, M., Fritz, C., McIlraith, S.: Planning with qualitative temporal preferences. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2006), Lake District, UK, pp. 134–144 (June 2006), 200603101347_KR06BienvenuM.pdfGoogle Scholar
- 7.Brewka, G., Eiter, T.: Prioritizing default logic. In: Intellectics and Computational Logic. Applied Logic Series, vol. 19, pp. 27–45. Kluwer (2000)Google Scholar
- 9.Emerson, E.A.: Temporal and modal logic. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B, pp. 995–1072. MIT Press (1990)Google Scholar
- 11.Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 46–57 (1977)Google Scholar