1 / 16

On State Management in Plan-Space Planning from CP Perspective

On State Management in Plan-Space Planning from CP Perspective. Pavel Surynek Charles University, Prague. Problem we are solving. a set of actions of the form (name; preconditions; effects) example: action that moves robot from A to B (move-robot-AB; prec={at(robot, A)};

frieda
Download Presentation

On State Management in Plan-Space Planning from CP Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. On State Management in Plan-Space Planning from CP Perspective Pavel Surynek Charles University, Prague

  2. Problem we are solving • a set of actions of the form • (name; preconditions; effects) example: action that moves robot from A to B (move-robot-AB; prec={at(robot, A)}; effects={at(robot, B), at(robot,A}) • a goal is a set of literals example: {at(robot_1,B); at(robot_2,C)} • find a sequence of actions satisfying a specified goal starting from a specified state ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  3. State Variables • instead of saying that something is true or false say: • a certain property takes a certain value example: location(robot)=A • change actions and goals according to the above scheme: example of an action with state variables: (move-robot-AB; prec={location(robot)=A)}; effects={location(robot)=B}) example of a goal with state variables: {location(robot_1)=B; location(robot_2)≠C} ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  4. State-Space Planning • maintain current state of the planning world at every stage of the planning process example of a state (set of propositions): {location(pack_X)=robot; location(robot)=B; ...} • forward/backward search algorithms • evolve the initial/goal state using actions • systematically try alternative actions (backtracking) • domain specific heuristics extract information from current state ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  5. Plan-Space Planning • partial plan is a structure of the form: • (actions, precedence relations, causal links) • precedence relations are between actions example: action move-robot-AB must be performedbeforeload-pack-B • causal links are relations of the form: action1 →(e) action2 • action1 has an effect e which is required by action2 • algorithms refine partial plan until a valid plan can be extracted from it ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  6. State-Space x Plan-Space • State-Spaceapproach: • world states are explicitly present through the whole reasoning process • allows an easier incorporation of domain specific heuristics • Plan-Space approach: • lack of explicit world states • provides a framework for search space pruning through imposing of constrains ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  7. CSP and Plan-Space • partial plan has similar structure asCSP • can be expressed as CSP • partial plan is changed during search for solution → dynamic CSP • standard definition - sequence of CSPs, description of changes, all CSPs have to be solved • our augmented definition - only the final CSP in the sequence of dynamic CSP must be solved ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  8. Constraint Model • Constraint model for modeling partial plans (of length at most l) • Variables, constraints and evolution in time (dynamic problem) • Variables for actions • domains contain possible moments of execution example: move-robot-AB{1,2,3,...,l} • Constraints for expressing precedence relations • standard ordering constraints example: move-robot-AB<load-package-B ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  9. Incorporation of States • Special precondition and effect variables • associated with every action in the partial plan • a precondition/effect variable for every state variable function • domain of the variable is same as the range of corresponding state variable function example: location(robot)={A,B,C} (st.var.func.)move_robot_AB-location-precond{A,B,C}move_robot_AB-location-effect{A,B,C} ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  10. State Constraints • State transition constraints • precedence and effect variables must be consistent with corresponding action • Frame axiom constraints • precedence and effect variables not affected by an action must not change its value • Threat resolving constraints • if an action a is a threat for a pair of actionsc →(e) d then it must be before or after both example: (a<c) or (d<a) ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  11. Strong State Constraints • Unique action time constraints • every action must be performed at a unique moment • implemented using allDifferent constraint • stronger propagation than standard ordering constraints • State sequencing constraints • if it is known that two actions must be executed right after each other: • then effect variables of the first must take the same values as precondition variables of the second ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  12. The Utility of States • States managed within the model allowsto deduce more information • unique action time constraints and state sequencing constraints removes values from the domains of action variables • maximum plan length l is very tight • searching of the shortest plan • unique action time constraint propagates well • state sequencing constraints are activated frequently ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  13. Algorithm • Constraint model changed dynamically by the solving algorithm • Algorithm consists of four interleaved phases: • enforcing arc-consistency in the model • threat resolutionphase • treats are resolved by adding threat resolving constraints • open goal resolution phase • unsatisfied preconditions → add new actions (add variables and constraints) or causal link • labeling of variables of the model • standard method how CSP is solved (select a variable and a valueand assign) ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  14. Details of the algorithm • Arc consistency • maintained incrementally • special algorithm for maintaining arc-consistency of the allDifferent constraint (unique action time) • Threat and open goals • must be detected by the algorithm in the CSP model • the algorithm actively modifies the CSP model • Labeling (no threat, no open goals) • performed by adding of constraints (alternatives X=1; X≠1) ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  15. Preliminary Experiments ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

  16. Conclusions • Plan-Space partial plans expressed using CP • a model for stronger constraint propagation is proposed • planning world states are maintained within the constraint model • allows additional types of constraints (state sequencing and unique time constraints)→ stronger propagation • The model was used to design an algorithm • state management reduces the total number of steps (preliminary experiments) ICAPS 2006 Pavel Surynek

More Related