Abstract
Hierarchical planners create descriptions of abstract states and divide their planning task into subproblems for refining these states. In spite of their success in reducing the search space, they classically assume the existence of certain and complete information. In real world planning instances, one has to select among alternative strategies at each abstract state, observing both incomplete knowledge of the attributes that each strategy may pose, and partial ordering of these attributes. In addition, reasoning is defeasible: further information may cause another alternative to be more preferable than what seems optimal at the moment. This work presents a planning framework based on qualitative value decision making formalisms. Sketching the appropriate strategy operator schemata for hierarchical planning, it focuses on aspects of uncertainty handling by combining abilities of constraint programming languages with the introduced concepts of credulous and skeptical conclusions of an issue. The topics of argumentation among the planning agents and common conflicts in the ordering of defaults are discussed by means of a real planning example.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, J.F., Schubert, L.K., Ferguson, G., Heeman, P., Hwang, C.H., Kato, Ts., Light, M., Martin, N., Miller, Br., Poesio, M., Traum, D.R.: The TRAINS project: a case study in building a conversational planning agent. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 7, (1995) 7–48.
Brewka, G.: Preferred Subtheories — An Extended Logical Framework for Default Reasoning. Proceedings of IJCAI-89, Detroit (1989) 1043–1048.
Brewka, G.: Reasoning about Priorities in Default Logic. Proceedings of AAAI-94, Seattle (1994) 940–945.
Brewka, G., Gordon, Th.: How to Buy a Porsche: An Approach to Defeasible Decision Making. Working Notes of AAAI-94 Workshop on Computational Dialectics, Seattle (1994) 28–38 (available in http://nathan.gmd.de/projects/zeno/ zeno2.html).
Brewka, G., Gordon, Th., Karacapilidis, N.I.: Mediating Systems for Group Decision Making: the Zeno System. KI-95 (German National AI Conference) Workshop on Computational Dialectics: Models of Argumentation, Negotiation and Decision Making, Bielefeld, Germany (1995); to appear.
Doyle, J., Shoham, Y., Wellman, M.P.: A Logic of Relative Desire. in Z.W. Ras and M. Zemankova (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th Int. Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, ISMIS-91 (1991) 16–31 (available in http://medg.lcs.mit.edu/ftp/doyle).
Gordon, Th.: Computational Dialectics. Proceedings of Workshop Kooperative Juristische Informationssysteme, Wien, Austria, GMD Studien Nr. 241 (1994) 25–36 (available in http://nathan.gmd.de/projects/zeno/zeno2.html).
Haddawy, P., Hanks, St.: Utility Models for Goal-Directed Decision-Theoretic Planners. Technical Report TR 93-06-04, University of Washington, Dept. of CS and Engineering (1993); also under review in JAIR.
Karacapilidis, N.I., Gordon, Th.: Dialectical Planning. Proceedings of 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-95) Workshop on Intelligent Manufacturing Systems, Montreal (1995); to appear.
Karacapilidis, N.I., Pappis, C.P., Adamopoulos, G.I.: Designation of abstraction levels for handling uncertain and incomplete information in planning problems. 14th European Conference on Operational Research (EURO XIV), Jerusalem, Israel (1995); to appear.
Kushmerick, N., Hanks, St., Weld, D.: An Algorithm for Probabilistic Least-Commitment Planning. Proceedings of AAAI-94, Seattle (1994) 1073–1078.
Mansell, T.M.: A method for planning given uncertain and incomplete information. Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Washington (1993) 350–358.
Pearl, J.: Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: Networks of plausible inference. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA (1988).
Petrie, C.: Constrained Decision Revision. Proceedings of the Tenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-92, San Hose (1992) 393–400.
Sacerdoti, E.D.: Planning in a Hierarchy of Abstraction Spaces. Artificial Intelligence 5 (1974) 115–135.
Tan, S., Pearl, J.: Qualitative Decision Theory. Proceedings of AAAI-94, Seattle (1994) 928–933.
Wellman, M.P., Doyle, J.: Preferential Semantics for Goals. Proceedings of AAAI-91 (1991) 698–703 (available in http://medg.lcs.mit.edu/ftp/doyle).
Wilkins, D.E., Myers, K.L.: A Common Knowledge Representation for Plan Generation and Reactive Execution. SRI AI Center Technical Note 532R (1994); also to appear in Journal of Logic and Computation (available in http://www.ai.sri.com/people/wilkins/papers.html).
Williamson, M., Hanks, St.: Optimal Planning with a Goal-Directed Utility Model. Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems, Chicago (1994) 176–181.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Karacapilidis, N.I. (1995). Planning under uncertainty: A qualitative approach. In: Pinto-Ferreira, C., Mamede, N.J. (eds) Progress in Artificial Intelligence. EPIA 1995. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 990. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60428-6_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60428-6_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-60428-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45595-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive