skip to main content
research-article

Factored Planning: From Automata to Petri Nets

Authors Info & Claims
Published:17 February 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Factored planning mitigates the state explosion problem by avoiding the construction of the state space of the whole system and instead working with the system's components. Traditionally, finite automata have been used to represent the components, with the overall system being represented as their product. In this article, we change the representation of components to safe Petri nets. This allows one to use cheap structural operations like transition contractions to reduce the size of the Petri net before its state space is generated, which often leads to substantial savings compared with automata. The proposed approach has been implemented and proved efficient on several factored planning benchmarks. This article is an extended version of our ACSD 2013 paper [Jezequel et al. 2013], with the addition of the proofs and the experimental results of Sections 6 and 7.

References

  1. Eyal Amir and Barbara Engelhardt. 2003. Factored planning. In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 929--935. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Charles André. 1982. Structural transformations giving b-equivalent PT-nets. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Applications and Theory of Petri Nets. 14--28. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Avrim Blum and Merrick Furst. 1995. Fast planning through planning graph analysis. Artificial Intelligence 90, 1--2 (1995), 281--300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Hans Bodlaender. 1993. A linear time algorithm for finding tree-decompositions of small treewidth. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 226--234. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Blai Bonet, Patrik Haslum, Sarah Hickmott, and Sylvie Thiébaux. 2008. Directed unfolding of Petri nets. Transactions on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency 1, 1 (2008), 172--198. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Ronen Brafman and Carmel Domshlak. 2008. From one to many: Planning for loosely coupled multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. 28--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Tam-Anh Chu. 1987. Synthesis of Self-Timed VLSI Circuits from Graph-Theoretic Specifications. PhD thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. James C. Corbett. 1996. Evaluating deadlock detection methods for concurrent software. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 22 (1996), 161--180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Javier Esparza and Keijo Heljanko. 2008. Unfoldings -- A Partial-Order Approach to Model Checking. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Javier Esparza, Stefan Romer, and Walter Vogler. 1996. An improvement of McMillan's unfolding algorithm. Formal Methods in System Design 20, 3 (1996), 285--310. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Eric Fabre. 2007a. Bayesian Networks of Dynamic Systems. Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches. Université de Rennes.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Eric Fabre. 2007b. Trellis processes: A compact representation for runs of concurent systems. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 17, 3 (2007), 267--306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Eric Fabre and Loïg Jezequel. 2009. Distributed optimal planning: An approach by weighted automata calculus. In Proceedings of the 48th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. 211--216.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Eric Fabre, Loïg Jezequel, Patrik Haslum, and Sylvie Thiébaux. 2010. Cost-optimal factored planning: Promises and pitfalls. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. 65--72.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Peter Hart, Nils Nilsson, and Bertram Raphael. 1968. A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics 4, 2 (1968), 100--107.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Sarah Hickmott, Jussi Rintanen, Sylvie Thiébaux, and Lang White. 2007. Planning via Petri net unfolding. In Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1904--1911. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Loïg Jezequel. 2012. Distributed Cost-Optimal Planning. PhD dissertation. ENS Cachan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Loïg Jezequel, Eric Fabre, and Victor Khomenko. 2013. Factored planning: From automata to petri nets. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Application of Concurrency to System Design. 137--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Victor Khomenko, Alex Kondratyev, Maciej Koutny, and Walter Vogler. 2006. Merged processes: A new condensed representation of petri net behaviour. Acta Informatica 43, 5 (2006), 307--330. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Victor Khomenko, Mark Schaefer, and Walter Vogler. 2008. Output-determinacy and asynchronous circuit synthesis. Fundamenta Informaticae 88, 4 (2008), 541--579. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Victor Khomenko, Mark Schaefer, Walter Vogler, and Ralf Wollowski. 2009. STG decomposition strategies in combination with unfolding. Acta Informatica 46, 6 (2009), 433--474. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Walter Vogler and Ben Kangsah. 2007. Improved decomposition of signal transition graphs. Fundamenta Informaticae 78, 1 (2007), 161--197. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in

Full Access

  • Published in

    cover image ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems
    ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems  Volume 14, Issue 2
    March 2015
    472 pages
    ISSN:1539-9087
    EISSN:1558-3465
    DOI:10.1145/2737797
    Issue’s Table of Contents

    Copyright © 2015 ACM

    Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 17 February 2015
    • Accepted: 1 September 2014
    • Revised: 1 March 2014
    • Received: 1 October 2013
    Published in tecs Volume 14, Issue 2

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader