The agent design problem is as follows: given a specification of an environment, together with a specification of a task, is it possible to construct an agent that can be guaranteed to successfully accomplish the task in the environment? In this article, we study the computational complexity of the agent design problem for tasks that are of the form “achieve this state of affairs” or “maintain this state of affairs.” We consider three general formulations of these problems (in both non-deterministic and deterministic environments) that differ in the nature of what is viewed as an “acceptable” solution: in the least restrictive formulation, no limit is placed on the number of actions an agent is allowed to perform in attempting to meet the requirements of its specified task. We show that the resulting decision problems are intractable, in the sense that these are non-recursive (but recursively enumerable) for achievement tasks, and non-recursively enumerable for maintenance tasks. In the second formulation, the decision problem addresses the existence of agents that have satisfied their specified task within some given number of actions. Even in this more restrictive setting the resulting decision problems are either pspace-complete or np-complete. Our final formulation requires the environment to be history independent and bounded. In these cases polynomial time algorithms exist: for deterministic environments the decision problems are nl-complete; in non-deterministic environments, p-complete.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
J.F. Allen, J. Hendler, and A. Tate, eds., Readings in Planning (Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, California, 1990).
C. Baral, V. Kreinovich and R. Trejo, Computational complexity of planning and approximate planning in presence of incompleteness, in: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-99) (Stockholm, Sweden, 1999).
T. Bylander, The computational complexity of propositional STRIPS planning, Artificial Intelligence 69(1–2) (1994) 165–204.
P.E. Dunne, Computability Theory-Concepts and Applications (Ellis-Horwood, Chichester, England, 1991).
M. Euwe, Mengentheoretische Betrachten über das Schachspiel, Proceedings of the Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, Amsterdam 32 (1929) 633–642.
R.E. Fikes and N. Nilsson, STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving, Artificial Intelligence 2 (1971) 189–208.
L.M. Goldschlager, The monotone and planar circuit value problems are log space complete for p, SIGACT Newsletter 9(2) (1977) 25–29.
L.P. Kaelbling, M.L. Littman and A.R. Cassandra, Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains, Artificial Intelligence 101 (1998) 99–134.
V. Lifschitz, On the semantics of STRIPS, in: Reasoning About Actions and Plans – Proceedings of the 1986 Workshop, eds. M.P. Georgeff and A.L. Lansky (Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, California, 1986) pp. 1–10.
M.L. Littman, J. Goldsmith and M. Mundhenk, The computational complexity of probabilistic planning, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 9 (1998) 1–36.
Z. Manna and A. Pnueli, The Temporal Logic of Reactive and Concurrent Systems (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1992).
Z. Manna and A. Pnueli, Temporal Verification of Reactive Systems-Safety (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1995).
M. Morse, Abstract 360: A solution of the problem of infinite play in chess, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 44 (1938) 632.
C.H. Papadimitriou, Computational Complexity (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1994).
C.H. Papadimitriou and M. Yannakakis, The complexity of facets (and some facets of complexity) in: Proceedings of the Fourteenth ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC-82) (San Francisco, California, 1982), pp. 255–260.
A. Pnueli and R. Rosner, On the synthesis of s reactive module, in: Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Symposium on the Principle of Programming Language (POPL), January 1989, pp. 179–190.
A. Pnueli and R. Rosner, On the synthesis of an asynchronous reactive module, in: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programs, 1989.
E. Prouhet, Mémoire sur quelques relations entre les puissances des nombres, R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I 33 (1851) 225.
S. Russell and D. Subramanian, Provably bounded-optimal agents, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 2 (1995) 575–609.
A.P. Sistla and E.M. Clarke, The complexity of propositional linear temporal logics, Journal of the ACM 32(3) (1985) 733–749.
A. Thue, Über unendliche Zeichenreihen, Norske Videnskabers Selskabs Skrifter I, Matematisk-Naturvidenskapelig Klasse. 7 (1906) 1–22.
M. Wooldridge, The computational complexity of agent design problems, in: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS-2000) (Boston, Massachusetts, 2000) pp. 341–348.
M. Wooldridge, N.R. Jennings, Intelligent agents: Theory and practice, The Knowledge Engineering Review 10(2) (1995) 115–152.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wooldridge, M., Dunne, P.E. The complexity of agent design problems: Determinism and history dependence. Ann Math Artif Intell 45, 343–371 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-005-9003-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-005-9003-0