International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning

Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development pp 381-395 | Cite as

Case-Based Plan Recognition Under Imperfect Observability

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9343)

Abstract

SET-PR is a novel case-based recognizer that is robust to three kinds of input errors arising from imperfect observability, namely missing, mislabeled and extraneous actions. We extend our previous work on SET-PR by empirically studying its efficacy on three plan recognition datasets. We found that in the presence of higher input error rates, SET-PR significantly outperforms alternative approaches, which perform similarly to or outperform SET-PR in the presence of no input errors.

Keywords

Case-based reasoning Plan recognition Imperfect observability Graph representation Plan matching 

References

  1. Bauer, M.: Integrating probabilistic reasoning into plan recognition. Proceedings of the Eleventh European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 620–624. Wiley & Sons, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1994)Google Scholar
  2. Blaylock, N., Allen, J.: Statistical goal parameter recognition. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, pp. 297–304. Whistler, BC, Canada (2004)Google Scholar
  3. Blaylock, N., Allen, J.: Generating Artificial Corpora for Plan Recognition. In: Ardissono, L., Brna, P., Mitrović, A. (eds.) UM 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3538, pp. 179–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blaylock, N., Allen, J.: Hierarchical instantiated goal recognition. In: Kaminka, G., Pynadath, D., Geib, C. (eds.) Modeling Others from Observations: Papers from the AAAI Workshop (Technical Report WS-06-13). AAAI Press, Boston, MA (2006)Google Scholar
  5. Charniak, E., Goldman, R.P.: A bayesian model of plan recognition. Artif. Intell. 64(1), 53–79 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cox, M.T., Kerkez, B.: Case-based plan recognition with novel input. Control Intell. Syst. 34(2), 96–104 (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Duong, T.V., Bui, H.H., Phung, D.Q., Venkatesh, S.: Activity recognition and abnormality detection with the switching hidden semi-Markov model. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 838–845. IEEE Press, San Diego, CA (2005)Google Scholar
  8. Geib, C.W., Goldman, R.P.: A probabilistic plan recognition algorithm based on plan tree grammars. Artif. Intell. 173(11), 1101–1132 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson, M.: Relating metrics, lines and variables defined on graphs to problems in medicinal chemistry. Wiley, New York (1985)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Kautz, H., Allen, J.F.: Generalized plan recognition. In: Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 32–37. AAAI Press, Philadelphia, PA (1986)Google Scholar
  11. Levenshtein, V.I.: Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Sov. Phys. Dokl. 10(8), 707–710 (1966)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Maynord, M., Vattam, S., Aha, D.W.: Increasing the runtime speed of case-based plan recognition. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. AAAI Press, Hollywood, FL (2015, to appear)Google Scholar
  13. Nau, D.S., Au, T.C., Ilghami, O., Kuter, U., Murdock, J.W., Wu, D., Yaman, F.: SHOP2: an HTN planning system. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 20, 379–404 (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Pynadath, D.V., Wellman, M.P.: Accounting for context in plan recognition with application to traffic monitoring. In: Proceedings of Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 472–481. Morgan Kaufmann, Montreal, Quebec (1995)Google Scholar
  15. Ramirez, M., Geffner, H.: Probabilistic plan recognition using off-the-shelf classical planners. In: Proceedings of the Conference of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, Atlanta, GA (2010)Google Scholar
  16. Ramirez, M., Geffner, H.: Goal recognition over POMDPs: inferring the intention of a POMDP agent. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 2009–2014. AAAI Press, Barcelona, Spain (2011)Google Scholar
  17. Raymond, J.W., Willett, P.: Maximum common subgraph isomorphism algorithms for the matching of chemical structures. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 16, 521–533 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sánchez-Ruiz, A.A., Ontañón, S.: Least Common Subsumer Trees for Plan Retrieval. In: Lamontagne, L., Plaza, E. (eds.) ICCBR 2014. LNCS, vol. 8765, pp. 405–419. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  19. Serina, I.: Kernel functions for case-based planning. Artif. Intell. 174(16), 1369–1406 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Tecuci, D., Porter, B.W.: Memory based goal schema recognition. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. AAAI Press, Sanibel Island, FL (2009)Google Scholar
  21. van Beek, P.: An investigation of probabilistic interpretations of heuristics in plan recognition. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on User Modeling, pp. 113–120 (1996)Google Scholar
  22. Vattam, S.S., Aha, D.W., Floyd, M.: Case-Based Plan Recognition Using Action Sequence Graphs. In: Lamontagne, L., Plaza, E. (eds.) ICCBR 2014. LNCS, vol. 8765, pp. 495–510. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  23. Vattam, S., Aha, D.W., Floyd, M.: Error tolerant plan recognition: an empirical investigation. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference. AAAI Press, Hollywood, FL (2015, to appear)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NRC Postdoctoral Fellow, Naval Research Laboratory (Code 5514)Washington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence, Naval Research Laboratory (Code 5514)Washington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations