Skip to main content

Solving Fully-Observable Non-deterministic Planning Problems via Translation into a General Game

  • Conference paper
KI 2009: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (KI 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 5803))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a symbolic planner based on BDDs, which calculates strong and strong cyclic plans for a given non-deterministic input. The efficiency of the planning approach is based on a translation of the non-deterministic planning problems into a two-player turn-taking game, with a set of actions selected by the solver and a set of actions taken by the environment.

The formalism we use is a PDDL-like planning domain definition language that has been derived to parse and instantiate general games. This conversion allows to derive a concise description of planning domains with a minimized state vector, thereby exploiting existing static analysis tools for deterministic planning.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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. Bakera, M., Edelkamp, S., Kissmann, P., Renner, C.D.: Solving μ-calculus parity games by symbolic planning. In: MoChArt 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5348, pp. 15–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bercher, P., Mattmüller, R.: A planning graph heuristic for forward-chaining adversarial planning. In: ECAI, pp. 921–922 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bertoli, P., Cimatti, A., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Traverso, P.: MBP: A model based planner. In: IJCAI Workshop on Planning under Uncertainty and Incomplete Information, pp. 93–97 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bryant, R.E.: Graph-based algorithms for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers 35(8), 677–691 (1986)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bryce, D., Buffet, O.: 6th International Planning Competition: Uncertainty Part (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cassez, F., David, A., Fleury, E., Larsen, K.G., Lime, D.: Efficient on-the-fly algorithms for the analysis of timed games. In: Abadi, M., de Alfaro, L. (eds.) CONCUR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3653, pp. 66–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Cimatti, A., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Traverso, P.: Weak, strong, and strong cyclic planning via symbolic model checking. Artificial Intelligence 147(1–2), 35–84 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Cleaveland, R., Klein, M., Steffen, B.: Faster model checking for the modal μ-calculus. Theoretical Computer Science 663, 410–422 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Edelkamp, S.: Symbolic exploration in two-player games: Preliminary results. In: AIPS 2002, Workshop on Model Checking, pp. 40–48 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Edelkamp, S., Kissmann, P.: Symbolic classification of general two-player games. In: Dengel, A.R., Berns, K., Breuel, T.M., Bomarius, F., Roth-Berghofer, T.R. (eds.) KI 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5243, pp. 185–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Emerson, E.A., Jutla, C.S.: Tree automata, μ-calculus and determinacy. In: Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 368–377 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Helmert, M.: Understanding Planning Tasks: Domain Complexity and Heuristic Decomposition. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4929. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Jensen, R.M., Veloso, M.M., Bowling, M.H.: Obdd-based optimistic and strong cyclic adversarial planning. In: ECP, pp. 265–276 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kissmann, P., Edelkamp, S.: Instantiating general games. In: IJCAI-Workshop on General Game Playing (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Liu, X., Smolka, S.A.: Simple linear-time algorithms for minimal fixed points. In: Larsen, K.G., Skyum, S., Winskel, G. (eds.) ICALP 1998. LNCS, vol. 1443, pp. 53–66. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Love, N.C., Hinrichs, T.L., Genesereth, M.R.: General game playing: Game description language specification. Technical Report LG-2006-01, Stanford Logic Group (April 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. McMillan, K.L.: Temporal logic and model checking. In: Verification of Digital and Hybrid Systems, pp. 36–54 (1998)

    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

Kissmann, P., Edelkamp, S. (2009). Solving Fully-Observable Non-deterministic Planning Problems via Translation into a General Game. In: Mertsching, B., Hund, M., Aziz, Z. (eds) KI 2009: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. KI 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5803. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04617-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04617-9_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04616-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04617-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics