Skip to main content

Using Satisfiability for Non-optimal Temporal Planning

  • Conference paper
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2012)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7519))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

AI planning is one of the research fields that has benefited from employing satisfiability checking methods. These methods have been proved to be very effective in finding optimal plans for both classical and temporal planning. It is also known that by using planning-based heuristic information in solving SAT formulae, one can develop SAT-based planners that are competitive with state-of-the-art non-optimal planners in classical planning domains. However, using satisfiability for non-optimal temporal planning has not been investigated so far. The main difficulty in using satisfiability in temporal planning is the representation of time, which is a continuous concept. Previously introduced SAT-based temporal planners employed an explicit representation of time in the SAT formulation, which made the formulation too large for even very small problems. To overcome this problem, we introduce a novel method for converting temporal problems into a SAT encoding. We show how the size of the encoding can be reduced by abstracting out durations of planning actions. We also show that the new formulation is powerful enough to encode fully concurrent plans. We first use an off-the-shelf SAT solver to extract an abstract initial plan out of the new encoding. We then add the durations of actions to a relaxed version of the initial plan and verify the resulting temporally constrained plan by testing consistency of a certain related Simple Temporal Problem (STP). In the case of an inconsistency, a negative cycle within the corresponding Simple Temporal Network (STN) is detected and encoded into the SAT formulation to prevent the SAT solver from reproducing plans with similar cycles. This process is repeated until a valid temporal plan will be achieved. Our empirical results show that the new approach, while not using a planning-based heuristic function of any kind, is competitive with POPF, which is the state-of-the-art of expressively temporal heuristic planners.

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

Access this chapter

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. Kautz, H., Selman, B.: Planning as Satisfiability. In: Proceedings of 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 359–363. IOS Press (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Blum, A., Furst, M.: Fast Planning Through Planning Graph Analysis. Artificial Intelligence 90(1-2), 281–300 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Kautz, H., Selman, B.: Unifying SAT-based and Graph-based Planning. In: Proceedings of 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 318–325. AAAI Press (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Robinson, N., Gretton, C., Pham, D.N., Sattar, A.: SAT-Based Parallel Planning Using a Split Representation of Actions. In: Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. AAAI Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rintanen, J., Heljanko, K., Niemelä, I.: Parallel Encodings of Classical Planning as Satisfiability. In: Alferes, J.J., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3229, pp. 307–319. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Rintanen, J.: Planning with Specialized SAT Solvers. In: Proceedings of 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Younes, H.L.S., Simmons, R.G.: VHPOP: Versatile Heuristic Partial Order Planner. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 20, 405–430 (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Vidal, V., Geffner, H.: Branching and pruning: An optimal temporal POCL planner based on constraint programming. Artificial Intelligence 170(3), 298–335 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith, D.E., Weld, D.S.: Temporal planning with mutual exclusion reasoning. In: Proceedings of 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 326–337. AAAI Press (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Garrido, A., Fox, M., Long, D.: A temporal planning system for durative actions of PDDL2.1. In: Proceedings of 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 586–590. IOS Press (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gerevini, A., Serina, I.: LPG: a Planner based on Local Search for Planning Graphs. In: Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems, pp. 13–22. AAAI Press (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Eyerich, P., Mattmuller, R., Roger, G.: Unifying Context-Enhanced Additive Heuristic for Temporal and Numeric Planning. In: Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. AAAI Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Huang, R., Chen, Y., Zhang, W.: An optimal temporally expressive planner: Initial results and application to P2P network optimization. In: Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. AAAI Press (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mali, A.D., Liu, Y.: T-SATPLAN: A SAT-based Temporal Planner. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools 15(5), 779–802 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cushing, W., Kambhampati, S., Weld, D.S.: When is temporal planning really temporal? In: Proceedings of 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1852–1859. AAAI Press (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Halsey, K., Long, D., Fox, M.: Managing Concurrency in Planning Using Planner-Scheduler interaction. Artificial Intelligence 173(1), 1–44 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Coles, A.J., Coles, A., Fox, M., Long, D.: Forward-Chaining Partial-Order Planning. In: Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, pp. 42–49. AAAI Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hoffmann, J., Nebel, B.: The FF Planning System: Fast Plan Generation Through Heuristic Search. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 14, 253–302 (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Dechter, R., Meiri, I., Pearl, J.: Temporal Constraint Networks. Artificial Intelligence 49(1-3), 61–95 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Fox, M., Long, D.: PDDL2.1: An Extension to PDDL for Expressing Temporal Planning Domains. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 20, 61–124 (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Kautz, H., Selman, B., Hoffmann, J.: SatPlan: Planning as Satisfiability. IPC (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An Extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Strathclyde Planning Group, http://planning.cis.strath.ac.uk

  24. Coles, A., Coles, A., Olaya, A.G., Jiménez, S., López, C.L., Sanner, S., Yoon, S.: A Survey of the Seventh International Planning Competition. AI Magazine 33(1) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Rankooh, M.F., Mahjoob, A., Ghassem-Sani, G. (2012). Using Satisfiability for Non-optimal Temporal Planning. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7519. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33352-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33353-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics