【24h】

Evaluating Temporal Planning Domains

机译:评估时间规划域

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The last eight years have seen dramatic progress in temporal planning as highlighted by the temporal track in the last three International Planning Competitions (IPC). However, our recent work, (Cushing et al. 2007), showed that most of the competition winning planners are only complete for very restricted forms of temporal planning languages that are in a sense indistinguishable from STRIPS. In this paper we consider the impact of those results on the design of benchmark temporal planning domains, and by extension, the temporal planning competition. We start by setting out to verify our speculation that the competition domains are temporally simple. This turns out to be tricky, and we develop a set of increasingly powerful analytic methods for domain analysis. Our analysis establishes that the benchmark domains are indeed inherently sequential (i.e., do not require concurrency). We suggest some real-world domains with required concurrency, and use a compilation argument to show that these are harder in the sense that they correspond to longer sequential plans. We conclude with the argument that temporal planners should be evaluated on both inherently sequential domains as well as those requiring concurrency.
机译:在过去的八年中,时间规划有了显着进步,最近三届国际规划竞赛(IPC)的时间轨迹突显了这一点。但是,我们最近的工作(Cushing等人,2007年)表明,大多数赢得竞赛的计划者仅对时间限制性语言的非常有限的形式是完整的,这在某种意义上与STRIPS并无区别。在本文中,我们考虑了这些结果对基准时间规划域的设计的影响,并由此扩展了时间规划竞争。我们首先着手验证我们的猜测,即竞争领域在时间上是简单的。事实证明这很棘手,我们为领域分析开发了一套功能越来越强大的分析方法。我们的分析确定基准域确实是固有顺序的(即不需要并发)。我们建议一些具有必需并发性的实际域,并使用编译参数表明它们在对应于更长的顺序计划的意义上更难。我们得出这样的结论,即应该在固有顺序域以及需要并发性的域上对时间规划器进行评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号