Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On Linear Logic Planning and Concurrency

  • Conference paper
Language and Automata Theory and Applications (LATA 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 5196))

Abstract

We present an approach to linear logic planning where an explicit correspondence between partial order plans and multiplicative exponential linear logic proofs is established. This is performed by extracting partial order plans from sound and complete encodings of planning problems in multiplicative exponential linear logic in a way that exhibits a non-interleaving behavioral concurrency semantics. Relying on this fact, we argue that this work is a crucial step for establishing a common language for concurrency and planning that will allow to carry techniques and methods between these two fields.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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. Blum, A., Furst, M.: Fast planning through planning graph analysis. Artificial Intelligence 90, 281–300 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Boutilier, C., Brafman, R.: Partial-order planning with concurrent interacting actions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 14, 105–136 (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Bylander, T.: Complexity results for serial decomposability. In: Proc. of the Tenth National Conf. on AI (AAAI-1992), San Jose, pp. 729–734. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cervesato, I.: Petri nets and linear logic: a case study for logic programming. In: Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Declarative Programming: GULP-PRODE 1995, Marina di Vietri, Ital (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fikes, R.E., Nilsson, H.J.: STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence 2, 189–205 (1971)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Representing action and change by logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming 17(2/3–4), 301–321 (1993)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Action languages. Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence 2 (3–4), 193–210 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Girard, J.-Y.: Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50, 1–102 (1987)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Große, G., Hölldobler, S., Schneeberger, J.: Linear deductive planning. Journal of Logic and Computation 6 (2), 233–262 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Guglielmi, A.: Abstract Logic Programming in Linear Logic Independence and Causality in a First Order Calculus. PhD thesis, Universita di Pisa (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Guglielmi, A.: A system of interaction and structure. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 8(1), 1–64 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Ishihara, K., Hiraishi, K.: The completeness of linear logic for petri net models. Logic Journal of IGPL 9(4), 549–567 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Kahramanoğulları, O.: Nondeterminism and Language Design in Deep Inference. PhD thesis, Technische Universität Dresden (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kahramanoğulları, O.: System BV is NP-complete. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic (to appear, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kahramanoğulları, O.: Towards planning as concurrency. In: Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intellgence and Applications, AIA 2005, Innsbruck, Austria, pp. 387–393 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kahramanoğulları, O.: A deductive compositional approach to petri nets for systems biology. Poster presentation at the Computational Methods in Systems Biology Conference (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kanovich, M.I., Vauzeilles, J.: The classical AI planning problems in the mirror of horn linear logic: semantics, expressibility, complexity. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 11(6), 689–716 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Kanovich, M.I., Vauzeilles, J.: Strong planning under uncertainty in domains with numerous but identical elements (a generic approach). Theoretical Computer Science 379, 84–119 (2007)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Craig, A.: Knoblock. Generating parallel execution plans with a partial-order planner. In: Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems, pp. 98–103 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Küngas, P.: Linear logic for domain-independent AI planning (extended abstract). In: Proc. of Doctoral Consortium at 13th Int. Conf. on Automated Planning and Scheduling, ICAPS 2003, Trento, Italy, pp. 68–72 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lamarche, F., Straßburger, L.: Naming proofs in classical propositional logic. In: Urzyczyn, P. (ed.) TLCA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3461, pp. 246–261. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lipton, R.J.: The reachability problem requires exponential space. Technical Report 62, Yale University (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J.: From petri nets to linear logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 1, 66–101 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mart’i-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J.: Action and change in rewriting logic. In: Pareschi, R., Fronhofer, B. (eds.) Dynamic Worlds: From the Frame Problem to Knowledge Management, vol. 11–2, pp. 1–53. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Masseron, M., Tollu, C., Vauzeilles, J.: Generating plans in linear logic I–II. In: Veni Madhavan, C.E., Nori, K.V. (eds.) FSTTCS 1990. LNCS, vol. 472, pp. 63–75. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Miller, D.: The π-calculus as a theory in linear logic: Preliminary results. In: Lamma, E., Mello, P. (eds.) ELP 1992. LNCS, vol. 660, pp. 242–265. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pednault, E.P.D.: ADL: Exploring the middle ground between STRIPS and the situation calculus. In: Brachmann, R., Levesque, H.J., Reiter, R. (eds.) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proc. of the First Int. Conf (KR-1989), Toronto, ON, pp. 324–332. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Penberthy, J., Weld, D.: UCPOP: A sound, complete, partial order planner for ADL. In: KR 1992. Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Third International Conference, pp. 103–114 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Petri, C.A.: Kommunikation mit Automaten. PhD thesis, Institut für Instrumentelle Mathematik, Bonn (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Reiter, R.: Natural actions, concurrency and continuous time in the situation calculus. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 2–13. Morgan Kaufmann, Cambridge (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Straßburger, L.: MELL in the calculus of structures. Theoretical Computer Science 309, 213–285 (2003)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Thielscher, M.: Representing Actions in Equational Logic Programming. In: Van Hentenryck, P. (ed.) Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Logic Programming (ICLP), Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, pp. 207–224. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Tiu, A.: A system of interaction and structure II: The need for deep inference. Logical Methods in Computer Science 2(2),4: 1–24 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Winskel, G., Nielsen, M.: Models for concurrency. In: Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, vol. 4, pp. 1–148. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computing, Imperial College London,  

    Ozan Kahramanoğulları

Authors
  1. Ozan Kahramanoğulları
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Research Group on Mathematical Linguistics, Rovira i Virgili University, Plaza Imperial Tàrraco 1, 43005, Tarragona, Spain

    Carlos Martín-Vide

  2. Fachbereich Elektrotechnik/Informatik, Universität Kassel, Wilhelmshöher Allee 73, 34121, Kassel, Germany

    Friedrich Otto

  3. Fachbereich 4, Abteilung Informatik/Wirtschaftsinformatik, Universität Trier, Campus II, Gebäude H, 54286, Trier, Germany

    Henning Fernau

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kahramanoğulları, O. (2008). On Linear Logic Planning and Concurrency. In: Martín-Vide, C., Otto, F., Fernau, H. (eds) Language and Automata Theory and Applications. LATA 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5196. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88282-4_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88282-4_24

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-88281-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-88282-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation