Skip to main content

Probabilistic Planning with Imperfect Sensing Actions Using Hybrid Probabilistic Logic Programs

  • Conference paper
Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 5785))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Effective planning in uncertain environment is important to agents and multi-agents systems. In this paper, we introduce a new logic based approach to probabilistic contingent planning (probabilistic planning with imperfect sensing actions), by relating probabilistic contingent planning to normal hybrid probabilistic logic programs with probabilistic answer set semantics [24]. We show that any probabilistic contingent planning problem can be encoded as a normal hybrid probabilistic logic program. We formally prove the correctness of our approach. Moreover, we show that the complexity of finding a probabilistic contingent plan in our approach is NP-complete. In addition, we show that any probabilistic contingent planning problem, \(\cal PP\), can be encoded as a classical normal logic program with answer set semantics, whose answer sets corresponds to valid trajectories in \(\cal PP\). We show that probabilistic contingent planning problems can be encoded as SAT problems. We present a new high level probabilistic action description language that allows the representation of sensing actions with probabilistic outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baral, C., Gelfond, M., Rushton, N.: Probabilistic reasoning with answer sets. In: Logic Programming and Non-monotonic Reasoning. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baral, C., et al.: Reasoning about actions in a probabilistic setting. In: AAAI (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blum, A., Furst, M.: Fast planning through planning graph analysis. Artificial Intelligence 90(1-2), 297–298 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Blum, A., Langford, J.: Probabilistic planning in the Graphplan framework. In: ECP (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Draper, D., Hanks, S., Weld, D.: Probabilistic planning with information gathering and contingent execution. In: Proc. of the 2nd AIPS, pp. 31–37 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T.: Probabilistic reasoning about actions in nonmonotonic causal theories. In: 19th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 2003 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: ICSLP (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9(3-4), 363–385 (1991)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Representing action and change by logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming 17, 301–321 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Giunchiglia, E., Lierler, Y., Maratea, M.: Answer set programming based on propositional satisfiability. Journal of Automated Reasoning 36(4), 345–377 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Iocchi, L., Lukasiewicz, T., Nardi, D., Rosati, R.: Reasoning about actions with sensing under qualitative and probabilistic uncertainty. In: 16th ECAI (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kaelbling, L., Littman, M., Cassandra, A.: Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Artificial Intelligence 101, 99–134 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Kautz, H., Selman, B.: Pushing the envelope: planning, propositional logic, and stochastic search. In: Proc. of 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kushmerick, N., Hanks, S., Weld, D.: An algorithm for probabilistic planning. Artificial Intelligence 76(1-2), 239–286 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lin, F., Zhao, Y.: ASSAT: Computing answer sets of a logic program by SAT solvers. Artificial Intelligence 157(1-2), 115–137 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Littman, M., Goldsmith, J., Mundhenk, M.: The computational complexity of probabilistic planning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 9, 1–36 (1998)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Majercik, S., Littman, M.: MAXPLAN: A new approach to probabilistic planning. In: Proc. of the 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Majercik, S., Littman, M.: Contingent planning under uncertainty via stochastic satisfiability. Artificial Intelligence 147(1–2), 119–162 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Onder, N., Pollack, M.: Contingency Selection in plan generation. In: 4th ECP (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Saad, E.: Incomplete knowlege in hybrid probabilistic logic programs. In: JELIA (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Saad, E.: A logical approach to qualitative and quantitative reasoning. In: 9th European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Saad, E.: Probabilistic planning in hybrid probabilistic logic programs. 1st SUM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Saad, E., Pontelli, E.: Towards a more practical hybrid probabilistic logic programming framework. Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Saad, E., Pontelli, E.: A new approach to hybrid probabilistic logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Journal 48(3-4), 187–243 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Scherl, R., Levesque, H.: The frame problem and knowledge producing actions. In: AAAI (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Son, T., Baral, C.: Formalizing sensing actions - a transition function based approach. Artificial Intelligence 125(1-2), 19–91 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Subrahmanian, V.S., Zaniolo, C.: Relating stable models and AI planning domains. In: International Conference of Logic Programming, pp. 233–247 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tu, P., Son, T., Baral, C.: Reasoning and planning with sensing actions, incomplete information, and static causal laws using logic programming. TPLP 7(4), 377–450

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Saad, E. (2009). Probabilistic Planning with Imperfect Sensing Actions Using Hybrid Probabilistic Logic Programs. In: Godo, L., Pugliese, A. (eds) Scalable Uncertainty Management. SUM 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5785. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04388-8_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04388-8_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04387-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04388-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics