Advertisement

On the Evolution of Planner-Specific Macro Sets

  • Mauro VallatiEmail author
  • Lukáš Chrpa
  • Ivan Serina
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10640)

Abstract

In Automated Planning, generating macro-operators (macros) is a well-known reformulation approach that is used to speed-up the planning process. Most of the macro generation techniques aim for using the same set of generated macros on every problem instance of a given domain. This limits the usefulness of macros in scenarios where the environment and thus the structure of instances is dynamic, such as in real-world applications. Moreover, despite the wide availability of parallel processing units, there is a lack of approaches that can take advantage of multiple parallel cores, while exploiting macros.

In this paper we propose the Macro sets Evolution (MEvo) approach. MEvo has been designed for overcoming the aforementioned issues by exploiting multiple cores for combining promising macros –taken from a given pool– in different sets, while solving continuous streams of problem instances. Our empirical study, involving 5 state-of-the-art planning engines and a large number of planning instances, demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed MEvo approach.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Research was partially funded by the Czech Science Foundation (project no. 17-17125Y).

References

  1. 1.
    Armano, G., Cherchi, G., Vargiu, E.: Automatic generation of macro-operators from static domain analysis. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 955–956 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Botea, A., Enzenberger, M., Müller, M., Schaeffer, J.: Macro-FF: improving AI planning with automatically learned macro-operators. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 24, 581–621 (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chrpa, L., Vallati, M., McCluskey, T.L.: Mum: a technique for maximising the utility of macro-operators by constrained generation and use. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, ICAPS, pp. 65–73 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chrpa, L., Vallati, M., McCluskey, T.L.: On the online generation of effective macro-operators. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, pp. 1544–1550 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chrpa, L., Siddiqui, F.H.: Exploiting block deordering for improving planners efficiency. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI, pp. 1537–1543 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coles, A., Fox, M., Smith, A.: Online identification of useful macro-actions for planning. In: Proceedings of ICAPS, pp. 97–104 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gerevini, A.E., Saetti, A., Serina, I.: Planning through stochastic local search and temporal action graphs. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 20, 239–290 (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghallab, M., Nau, D., Traverso, P.: Automated Planning, Theory and Practice. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lipovetzky, N., Ramirez, M., Muise, C., Geffner, H.: Width and inference based planners: SIW, BFS(f), and probe. In: The Eighth International Planning Competition. Description of Participant Planners of the Deterministic Track, pp. 6–7 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    López, C.L., Celorrio, S.J., Olaya, Á.G.: The deterministic part of the seventh international planning competition. Artif. Intell. 223, 82–119 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Newton, M.A.H., Levine, J., Fox, M., Long, D.: Learning macro-actions for arbitrary planners and domains. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, ICAPS, pp. 256–263 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rintanen, J.: Engineering efficient planners with SAT. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 684–689 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rintanen, J.: Madagascar: scalable planning with SAT. In: The Eighth International Planning Competition. Description of Participant Planners of the Deterministic Track, pp. 66–70 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Valenzano, R., Nakhost, H., Müller, M., Schaeffer, J., Sturtevant, N.: Arvandherd 2014. In: The Eighth International Planning Competition. Description of Participant Planners of the Deterministic Track (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vallati, M., Chrpa, L., Grzes, M., McCluskey, T.L., Roberts, M., Sanner, S.: The 2014 international planning competition: progress and trends. AI Mag. 36(3), 90–98 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vidal, V.: YAHSP3 and YAHSP3-MT in the 8th international planning competition. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Planning Competition, IPC 2014, pp. 64–65 (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xie, F., Müller, M., Holte, R.: Jasper: the art of exploration in greedy best first search. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Planning Competition, IPC 2014 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computing and EngineeringUniversity of HuddersfieldHuddersfieldUK
  2. 2.Artificial Intelligence CenterCzech Technical University in PraguePragueCzech Republic
  3. 3.Faculty of Mathematics and PhysicsCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
  4. 4.Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’InformazioneUniversitá degli Studi di BresciaBresciaItaly

Personalised recommendations