Speeding Up Planning through Minimal Generalizations of Partially Ordered Plans

  • Radomír Černoch
  • Filip Železný
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6489)


We present a novel strategy enabling to exploit existing plans in solving new similar planning tasks by finding a common generalized core of the existing plans. For this purpose we develop an operator yielding a minimal joint generalization of two partially ordered plans. In three planning domains we show a substantial speed-up of planning achieved when the planner starts its search space exploration from the learned common generalized core, rather than from scratch.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ghallab, M., Nau, D., Traverso, P.: Automated Planning: theory and practice. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2004)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Botea, A., Enzenberger, M., Mller, M., Schaeffer, J.: Macro-FF: improving AI planning with automatically learned macro-operators. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 24, 581–621 (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coles, A., Smith, A.: Marvin: a heuristic search planner with online macro-action learning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 28, 119–156 (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chrpa, L., Bartak, R.: Towards getting domain knowledge: Plans analysis through investigation of actions dependencies. In: Florida Artificial Intelligence Conference (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fernandez, S., Aler, R., Borrajo, D.: Using previous experience for learning planning control knowledge. In: Florida Artificial Intelligence Conference (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoon, S.: Learning heuristic functions from relaxed plans. In: International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kambhampati, S., Yoon, S.: Explanation based learning for planning. In: Encyclopedia of Machine Learning. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dzeroski, S., Raedt, L.D., Blockeel, H.: Relational reinforcement learning. Machine Learning, 7–52 (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang, Y., Selman, B., Kautz, H.: Learning declarative control rules for constraint-based planning. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lorenzo, D., Otero, R.P.: Learning logic programs for action-selection in planning. In: Third International Workshop on Extraction of Knowledge from Databases at the 10th Portuguese Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Plotkin, G., Meltzer, B., Michie, D.: A note on inductive generalization. Machine Intelligence 5, 153–163 (1970)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuwabara, M., Ogawa, T., Hirata, K., Harao, M.: On generalization and subsumption for ordered clauses. In: New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tamaddoni-Nezhad, A., Muggleton, S.: The lattice structure and refinement operators for the hypothesis space bounded by a bottom clause. Machine Learning 76, 37–72 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Raedt, L.: Logical and relational learning. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Radomír Černoch
    • 1
  • Filip Železný
    • 1
  1. 1.Czech Technical University in PragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations