Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Reactive Policies with Planning for Action Languages

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10021))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Action languages are an important family of formalisms to represent action domains in a declarative manner and to reason about them. For this reason, the behavior of an agent in an environment may be governed by policies which take such action domain descriptions into account. In this paper, we describe a formal semantics for describing policies that express a reactive behavior for an agent, and connect our framework with the representation power of action languages. In this framework, we mitigate the large state spaces by employing the notion of indistinguishability, and combine components that are efficient for describing reactivity such as target establishment and (online) planning. Our representation allows one to analyze the flow of executing the given reactive policy, and lays foundations for verifying properties of policies. Additionally, the flexibility of the representation opens a range of possibilities for designing behaviors.

This work has been supported by Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project W1255-N23.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Proof sketches of this and further results are in the extended version at http://goo.gl/FXktqP.

  2. 2.

    For a formal definition of reachability, see the extended version at http://goo.gl/FXktqP.

References

  1. Baader, F., Zarrieß, B.: Verification of Golog programs over description logic actions. In: Fontaine, P., Ringeissen, C., Schmidt, R.A. (eds.) FroCoS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8152, pp. 181–196. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40885-4_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Behnke, G., Höller, D., Biundo, S.: On the complexity of htn plan verification and its implications for plan recognition. In: Proceedings of ICAPS, pp. 25–33 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bertoli, P., Cimatti, A., Riveri, M., Traverso, P.: Strong planning under partial observability. Artif. Intell. 170(4), 337–384 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bordini, R.H., Fisher, M., Visser, W., Wooldridge, M.: Verifying multi-agent programs by model checking. Auton. Agents Multi-agent Syst. 12(2), 239–256 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Montali, M., Patrizi, F.: Verification and synthesis in description logic based dynamic systems. In: Faber, W., Lembo, D. (eds.) RR 2013. LNCS, vol. 7994, pp. 50–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39666-3_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Cimatti, A., Riveri, M., Traverso, P.: Automatic OBDD-based generation of universal plans in non-deterministic domains. In: Proceedings of AAAI/IAAI, pp. 875–881 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cimatti, A., Riveri, M., Traverso, P.: Strong planning in non-deterministic domains via model checking. AIPS 98, 36–43 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Long, D.E.: Model checking and abstraction. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. (TOPLAS) 16(5), 1512–1542 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Claßen, J., Lakemeyer, G.: A logic for non-terminating Golog programs. In: Proceedings of KR, pp. 589–599 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. De Giacomo, G., Reiter, R., Soutchanski, M.: Execution monitoring of high-level robot programs. In: Proceedings of KR, pp. 453–465 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  11. De Giacomo, G., Ternovskaia, E., Reiter, R.: Non-terminating processes in the situation calculus. In: Working Notes of Robots, Softbots, Immobots: Theories of Action, Planning and Control, AAAI 1997 Workshop (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dennis, L.A., Fisher, M., Webster, M.P., Bordini, R.H.: Model checking agent programming languages. Autom. Softw. Eng. 19(1), 5–63 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Eiter, T., Erdem, E., Faber, W., Senko, J.: A logic-based approach to finding explanations for discrepancies in optimistic plan execution. Fundamenta Informaticae 79(1–2), 25–69 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Eiter, T., Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G., Polleres, A.: A logic programming approach to knowledge-state planning: semantics and complexity. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 5(2), 206–263 (2004). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/976706.976708

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: A uniform integration of higher-order reasoning and external evaluations in answer-set programming. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, pp. 90–96 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fichtner, M., Großmann, A., Thielscher, M.: Intelligent execution monitoring in dynamic environments. Fundamenta Informaticae 57(2–4), 371–392 (2003)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Fink, M., Germano, S., Ianni, G., Redl, C., Schüller, P.: ActHEX: implementing HEX programs with action atoms. In: Cabalar, P., Son, T.C. (eds.) LPNMR 2013. LNCS, vol. 8148, pp. 317–322. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40564-8_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Action languages. Electron. Trans. AI 3(16), 193–210 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Giunchiglia, E., Lifschitz, V.: An action language based on causal explanation: Preliminary report. In: Proceedings of AAAI/IAAI, pp. 623–630 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F.: From logic programming towards multi-agent systems. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 25(3–4), 391–419 (1999). http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1018934223383

  21. Lang, J., Zanuttini, B.: Knowledge-based programs as plans - the complexity of plan verification. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 504–509 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Levesque, H.J., Reiter, R., Lesperance, Y., Lin, F., Scherl, R.B.: GOLOG: a logic programming language for dynamic domains. J. Log. Program. 31(1), 59–83 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Lomuscio, A., Michliszyn, J.: Verification of multi-agent systems via predicate abstraction against ATLK specifications. In: Proceedings of AAMAS, pp. 662–670 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rao, A.S., Georgeff, M.P.: Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In: Proceedings of KR, pp. 473–484 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Son, T.C., Baral, C.: Formalizing sensing actions - a transition function based approach. Artif. Intell. 125(1), 19–91 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Soutchanski, M.: High-level robot programming and program execution. In: Proceedings of ICAPS Workshop on Plan Execution (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Turner, H.: Polynomial-length planning spans the polynomial hierarchy. In: Flesca, S., Greco, S., Leone, N., Ianni, G. (eds.) JELIA 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2424, pp. 111–124. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). doi:10.1007/3-540-45757-7_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technische Universität Wien, Vienna, Austria

    Zeynep G. Saribatur & Thomas Eiter

Authors
  1. Zeynep G. Saribatur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Eiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeynep G. Saribatur .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Loizos Michael

  2. University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Antonis Kakas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Saribatur, Z.G., Eiter, T. (2016). Reactive Policies with Planning for Action Languages. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_30

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_30

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48757-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48758-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics