Skip to main content

Conditional Epistemic Planning

  • Conference paper
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2012)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7519))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Recent work has shown that Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL) offers a solid foundation for automated planning under partial observability and non-determinism. Under such circumstances, a plan must branch if it is to guarantee achieving the goal under all contingencies (strong planning). Without branching, plans can offer only the possibility of achieving the goal (weak planning). We show how to formulate planning in uncertain domains using DEL and give a language of conditional plans. Translating this language to standard DEL gives verification of both strong and weak plans via model checking. In addition to plan verification, we provide a tableau-inspired algorithm for synthesising plans, and show this algorithm to be terminating, sound and complete.

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. Andersen, M.B., Bolander, T., Jensen, M.H.: Conditional epistemic planning (long version). Tech. rep. (2012), http://www2.imm.dtu.dk/~tb/cep-long.pdf

  2. Aucher, G.: An internal version of epistemic logic. Studia Logica 94(1), 1–22 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Aumann, R.J., Hart, S.: Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications. Elsevier (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baltag, A., Moss, L.S.: Logics for Epistemic Programs. Synthese 139, 165–224 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Baltag, A., Moss, L.S., Solecki, S.: The logic of public announcements and common knowledge and private suspicions. In: TARK 1998, pp. 43–56 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baltag, A., Smets, S.: A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision. In: Bonanno, G., van der Hoek, W., Wooldridge, M. (eds.) Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory (LOFT7). Texts in Logic and Games, vol. 3, pp. 13–60. Amsterdam University Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Baral, C., Gelfond, G., Pontelli, E., Son, T.C.: An action language for reasoning about beliefs in multi-agent domains. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Barwise, J., Moss, L.: Vicious circles. CSLI Publications (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. van Benthem, J.: Dynamic odds and ends. Technical Report ML-1998-08, University of Amsterdam (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. van Benthem, J.: Games in dynamic-epistemic logic. Bulletin of Economic Research 53(4), 219–248 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Bolander, T., Andersen, M.B.: Epistemic planning for single- and multi-agent systems. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 21, 9–34 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. van Ditmarsch, H., Kooi, B.: Semantic results for ontic and epistemic change. In: LOFT 7, pp. 87–117. Amsterdam University Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  13. van Ditmarsch, H., van der Hoek, W., Kooi, B.: Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Springer (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ghallab, M., Nau, D.S., Traverso, P.: Automated Planning: Theory and Practice. Morgan Kaufmann (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Horrocks, I., Hustadt, U., Sattler, U., Schmidt, R.: Computational modal logic. In: Handbook of Modal Logic. Elsevier (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  16. de Lima, T.: Optimal Methods for Reasoning about Actions and Plans in Multi-Agents Systems. Ph.D. thesis, IRIT, University of Toulouse 3, France (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Löwe, B., Pacuit, E., Witzel, A.: DEL Planning and Some Tractable Cases. In: van Ditmarsch, H., Lang, J., Ju, S. (eds.) LORI 2011. LNCS, vol. 6953, pp. 179–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Rintanen, J.: Complexity of planning with partial observability. In: Zilberstein, S., Koehler, J., Koenig, S. (eds.) ICAPS, pp. 345–354. AAAI (2004)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Andersen, M.B., Bolander, T., Jensen, M.H. (2012). Conditional Epistemic Planning. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7519. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33352-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33353-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics