state agnostic planning graphs william cushing daniel bryce arizona state university...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
State Agnostic Planning Graphs
William CushingDaniel Bryce
Arizona State University{william.cushing, dan.bryce}@asu.edu
Special thanks to:Subbarao Kambhampati, David E. Smith,
Menkes van den Briel, Romeo Sanchez, J. Benton
Motivation
Reachability analysis (via Planning Graphs) Sets of planning graphs are useful
Progression search Belief-space planning Replanning Robustification Local search …
…but highly redundant PGs overlap (duplicate information) PGs are inflexible (fixed source) Generalize PG to multiple sources
p5
q5
r5
p6
opqopr
o56
p
5
pqr56
opqopr
o56
pqrst567
ops
oqto67
q
5
qtr56
oqtoqr
o56
qtrsp567
oqs
otpo67r
5
rqp56
orqorp
o56
rqpst567
ors
oqto67
p
6
pqr67
opqopr
o67
pqrst678
ops
oqto78
Introduction
1
3
4
1
3
o12
o34
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
2
3
4
5
3
5
o34
o56
3
4
5
o34
o45
o56
6 6
7
o67
1
5
1
5
o12
o56
2
1
3
5
o12
o23
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
GoG
GoG
GoG
GoG
GoG
1
3
3
5
1
5
h( )=5
Overview
Scratch
State Agnostic Graph
Planning GraphsBuildPG(A)
BuildSAG()
1. Labeled Uncertainty Graph [LUG]
2. (Belief) State Agnostic LUG [SALUG]
3. Optimized (Belief) State Agnostic LUG [SLUG]
ExtractH(A,B)
Reachability Queries
ExtractH(A,B)
Technique: Transform BuildPG(A) into BuildSAG()
Introduction
Multiple Graphs
13
35
15
1
3
4
1
3
o122
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o232
3
4
5
3
5
o34
o56
3
4
5
o34
o45
o566 6
7o67
1
5
1
5o56
2
1
3
5
o12
o56
2
6 6
7o67
h( )=5
GoG
GoG
G
G
G
Heuristics for belief-space
G
D. Bryce and S. Kambhampati, “Heuristic Guidance Measures for Conformant Planning”, In ICAPS’04, 2004.
o34
o45
o12
o23
oG
oG
oG
11o12
2
1o12
o232
Unioned Graphs
13
35
15
3
4
3o34
3
4
5
o34
o45
11o12
2
1o12
o232
3
4
5
3
5
o34
o56
3
4
5
o34
o45
o566 6
7o67
11o12
2
1
3
o12
o232
55o56
5o56
6 6
7o67
GoG
GoG
GoG
GoG
GoG
GoG
GoG
Heuristics for belief-space
G
Unioned Graphs
11o12
2
1o12
o232
3
4
5
3
5
o34
o56
3
4
5
o34
o45
o566 6
7o67
GoG
GoG
GoG
h( )=1
Heuristics for belief-space
G
13
35
15
3
5
h( )=5Labeled Graph [LUG]
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7o67
oG
G G G
oG oG
Heuristics for belief-space
13
35
15
G
D. Bryce, S. Kambhampati, and D. Smith, “Planning in Belief Space with a Labelled Uncertainty Graph”, In AAAI Workshop on
Markov Processes, 2004.
Labeled Graph [LUG]
1 ^ 3 ^ -5 ^ γ3 ^ 5 ^ -1 ^ γ1 ^ 5 ^ -3 ^ γ1 ^ 3v5 ^ -3v-5 ^ γ3 ^ 1v5 ^ -1v-5 ^ γ5 ^ 1v3 ^ -1v-3 ^ γ
1v3 ^ 3v5 ^ 1v5 ^ -1v-3v-5 ^ γ
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o56
2
6
oG
G
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6
7o67
G
oG
G
oG
Binary Decision Diagrams
Initialize: and/projection
Operator: and/preconditions
Literal: or/supporters
Heuristics for belief-space
D. Bryce, S. Kambhampati, and D. Smith, “Planning in Belief Space with a Labelled Uncertainty Graph”, In AAAI Workshop on
Markov Processes, 2004.
13
35
15
1
3
5
G
γ = “everything else false”
Multiple (Labeled) Graphs
1
3
3
5
1
3
3
5
1
5
1
3
1
5
3
5
1
5
1
3
5
1
3
5
1
3
5
1
3
5
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o56
2
6
oG
G
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o56
2
6
oG
G
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o56
2
6
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o56
2
6
oG
G
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6
7
o67
G
oG
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6
7
o67
G
oG
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6
7
o67
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6
7
o67
G
oG
G
oG
G
oG
G
oG
G
oG
Single graph for progression
D. Bryce, S. Kambhampati, and D. Smith, “Planning Graph Heuristics for Belief Space Search”, ASU CSE TR, 2005.
3
5
1
5
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
oG
G G G
oG oG
1
3
1
5
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
G
oG
1
3
3
5
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
oG
G G G
oG oG1
3
3
5
1
5
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
oG
G G G
oG oG
Unioned (Labeled) Graph
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6
7o67
G G
oG oG
1
3
4
5
2
6
G
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
oG13
35
15
Single graph for progression
Introduce labels for beliefs over labels for states
Labeled (Labeled) Graph [SALUG]
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
oG
G G G
oG oG13
35
15
Sr v Sb
Sb v Sg
Sr v Sg
Sr^Sb^Sg => 1v3 ^ 3v5 ^ 1v5 ^ -1v-3v-5 ^ γ-Sr => 5 ^ 1v3 ^ -1v-3 ^ γ-Sb => 1 ^ 3v5 ^ -3v-5 ^ γ-Sg => 3 ^ 1v5 ^ -1v-5 ^ γ
Single graph for progression
W. Cushing and D. Bryce, “State Agnostic Planning Graphs”, In AAAI, 2005.
Labeled (Labeled) Graph [SALUG]
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7
o67
oG
G G G
oG oG13
35
15
Single graph for progression
W. Cushing and D. Bryce, “State Agnostic Planning Graphs”, In AAAI, 2005.
Filtered Unioned (Labeled) Graph [SLUG]
13
15
1
3
4
5
1
3
5
o12
o34
o56
2
1
3
4
5
o12
o34
o23
o45
o56
2
6 6
7o67
oG
G G G
oG oG
35
Don’t let the name fool you!
Ignore irrelevant labels
Largest LUG == all LUGs
Optimized single graph
W. Cushing and D. Bryce, “State Agnostic Planning Graphs”, In AAAI, 2005.
Belief Space Problems Classical Problems
Conformant Contingent
Empirical Results
Conclusion
Developed general agnosticism (SAG) Removed dependence on world state (PG LUG) Removed dependence on belief state (LUG SALUG)
Dramatically improved performance ({LUG,SALUG} ~> SLUG)
Empirically demonstrated Internal performance boost Favorable external comparison
SAG has rich connections to: Constraint propagation (vs. branching) Lazy evaluation Memoization
Further Details
Heuristics for belief space in the CAltAlt planner D. Bryce and S. Kambhampati, “Heuristic Guidance Measures for
Conformant Planning”, In ICAPS’04, 2004. Labeled Uncertainty Graph in the CAltAlt planner
D. Bryce, S. Kambhampati, and D. Smith, “Planning in Belief Space with a Labelled Uncertainty Graph”, In AAAI Workshop on Markov Processes, 2004.
Heuristics and LUG in the POND and CAltAlt planners D. Bryce, S. Kambhampati, and D. Smith, “Planning Graph
Heuristics for Belief Space Search”, ASU CSE TR, 2005. SLUG: Improvement to LUG for POND
W. Cushing and D. Bryce, “State Agnostic Planning Graphs”, In AAAI, 2005.
CLUG: propagating numeric information D. Bryce and S. Kambhampati, “Cost Sensitive Reachability
Heuristics for Handling State Uncertainty”, In UAI’05, 2005.
top related