SOCS 1 GamePlan: AN ADVERSARIAL PLANER IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM (A Preliminary Report) Wenjin Lue and Kostas Stathis City University, London Dagstuhl, 26th.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Language for planning problems
Advertisements

Planning II: Partial Order Planning
Planning Module THREE: Planning, Production Systems,Expert Systems, Uncertainty Dr M M Awais.
Constraint Based Reasoning over Mutex Relations in Graphplan Algorithm Pavel Surynek Charles University, Prague Czech Republic.
CLASSICAL PLANNING What is planning ?  Planning is an AI approach to control  It is deliberation about actions  Key ideas  We have a model of the.
1 Graphplan José Luis Ambite * [* based in part on slides by Jim Blythe and Dan Weld]
Plan Generation & Causal-Link Planning 1 José Luis Ambite.
Λ14 Διαδικτυακά Κοινωνικά Δίκτυα και Μέσα Positive and Negative Relationships Chapter 5, from D. Easley and J. Kleinberg book.
Graph-based Planning Brian C. Williams Sept. 25 th & 30 th, J/6.834J.
For Monday Finish chapter 12 Homework: –Chapter 13, exercises 8 and 15.
PLANNING IN AI. Determine the set of steps that are necessary to achieve a goal Some steps might be conditional, i.e., they are only taken when a set.
Planning and Scheduling. 2 USC INFORMATION SCIENCES INSTITUTE Some background Many planning problems have a time-dependent component –  actions happen.
Best-First Search: Agendas
Planning CSE 473 Chapters 10.3 and 11. © D. Weld, D. Fox 2 Planning Given a logical description of the initial situation, a logical description of the.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [INTELLIGENT AGENTS PARADIGM] Professor Janis Grundspenkis Riga Technical University Faculty of Computer Science and Information.
1 Chapter 16 Planning Methods. 2 Chapter 16 Contents (1) l STRIPS l STRIPS Implementation l Partial Order Planning l The Principle of Least Commitment.
Fast Planning through Planning Graph Analysis By Jan Weber Jörg Mennicke.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture12: Decidable Languages Prof. Amos Israeli.
Planning Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Chapter 11.
Default and Cooperative Reasoning in Multi-Agent Systems Chiaki Sakama Wakayama University, Japan Programming Multi-Agent Systems based on Logic Dagstuhl.
Planning: Part 3 Planning Graphs COMP151 April 4, 2007.
Knowledge Acquisitioning. Definition The transfer and transformation of potential problem solving expertise from some knowledge source to a program.
© nCode 2000 Title of Presentation goes here - go to Master Slide to edit - Slide 1 Reliable Communication for Highly Mobile Agents ECE 7995: Term Paper.
Extending Graphplan to handle Resources Presenter: Pham Van Cuong Department of Computer Science New Mexico State University.
1 Trust Management and Theory Revision Ji Ma School of Computer and Information Science University of South Australia 24th September 2004, presented at.
Planning II CSE 473. © Daniel S. Weld 2 Logistics Tournament! PS3 – later today Non programming exercises Programming component: (mini project) SPAM detection.
Planning Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Chapter 11.
Lesson 6. Refinement of the Operator Model This page describes formally how we refine Figure 2.5 into a more detailed model so that we can connect it.
1 Planning Chapters 11 and 12 Thanks: Professor Dan Weld, University of Washington.
Planning II CSE 573. © Daniel S. Weld 2 Logistics Reading for Wed Ch 18 thru 18.3 Office Hours No Office Hour Today.
Classical Planning Chapter 10.
For Wednesday Read chapter 12, sections 3-5 Program 2 progress due.
CP Summer School Modelling for Constraint Programming Barbara Smith 1.Definitions, Viewpoints, Constraints 2.Implied Constraints, Optimization,
Jonathon Doran. The Planning Domain A domain describes the objects, facts, and actions in the universe. We may have a box and a table in our universe.
Homework 1 ( Written Portion )  Max : 75  Min : 38  Avg : 57.6  Median : 58 (77%)
Argumentation and Trust: Issues and New Challenges Jamal Bentahar Concordia University (Montreal, Canada) University of Namur, Belgium, June 26, 2007.
CS.462 Artificial Intelligence SOMCHAI THANGSATHITYANGKUL Lecture 07 : Planning.
Planning, page 1 CSI 4106, Winter 2005 Planning Points Elements of a planning problem Planning as resolution Conditional plans Actions as preconditions.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 22 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 22 of 42 Planning: Sensorless and.
Actions Planning and Defeasible Reasoning Guillermo R. Simari Alejandro J. García Marcela Capobianco Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering U NIVERSIDAD.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Lecture 21 of 42 CIS 530 / 730 Artificial Intelligence Lecture 21 of 42 Planning: Graph Planning.
1 Chapter 16 Planning Methods. 2 Chapter 16 Contents (1) l STRIPS l STRIPS Implementation l Partial Order Planning l The Principle of Least Commitment.
Introduction to Planning Dr. Shazzad Hosain Department of EECS North South Universtiy
June 6 th, 2005 ICAPS-2005 Workshop on Constraint Programming for Planning and Scheduling 1/12 Stratified Heuristic POCL Temporal Planning based on Planning.
AI Lecture 17 Planning Noémie Elhadad (substituting for Prof. McKeown)
Dana Nau: Lecture slides for Automated Planning Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License:
Graphplan.
Robust Planning using Constraint Satisfaction Techniques Daniel Buettner and Berthe Y. Choueiry Constraint Systems Laboratory Department of Computer Science.
Graphplan: Fast Planning through Planning Graph Analysis Avrim Blum Merrick Furst Carnegie Mellon University.
Introduction to State Space Search
1 CMSC 471 Fall 2004 Class #21 – Thursday, November 11.
Automated Planning and Decision Making Prof. Ronen Brafman Automated Planning and Decision Making Graphplan Based on slides by: Ambite, Blyth and.
Graphplan CSE 574 April 4, 2003 Dan Weld. Schedule BASICS Intro Graphplan SATplan State-space Refinement SPEEDUP EBL & DDB Heuristic Gen TEMPORAL Partial-O.
1 Section 13.1 Turing Machines A Turing machine (TM) is a simple computer that has an infinite amount of storage in the form of cells on an infinite tape.
1 Turing Machines and Equivalent Models Section 13.1 Turing Machines.
ADVANCED PLANNING TECHNIQUES Dr. Adam Anthony Lecture 22.
An argument-based framework to model an agent's beliefs in a dynamic environment Marcela Capobianco Carlos I. Chesñevar Guillermo R. Simari Dept. of Computer.
Foundations of Software Testing Chapter 5: Test Selection, Minimization, and Prioritization for Regression Testing Last update: September 3, 2007 These.
Heuristic Search Planners. 2 USC INFORMATION SCIENCES INSTITUTE Planning as heuristic search Use standard search techniques, e.g. A*, best-first, hill-climbing.
Review for the Midterm Exam
Class #17 – Thursday, October 27
Announcements Homework 3 due today (grace period through Friday)
Graphplan/ SATPlan Chapter
Class #19 – Monday, November 3
Graphplan/ SATPlan Chapter
Game Reformulation General Game Playing Lecture 7
Graphplan/ SATPlan Chapter
GraphPlan Jim Blythe.
An Introduction to Planning Graph
[* based in part on slides by Jim Blythe and Dan Weld]
Presentation transcript:

SOCS 1 GamePlan: AN ADVERSARIAL PLANER IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM (A Preliminary Report) Wenjin Lue and Kostas Stathis City University, London Dagstuhl, 26th November, 2002

SOCS 2 Content Motivations and Background GamePlan, an extension of GraphPlan for Adversarial Planning in MAS. Further Work

SOCS 3 Background and Motivation SOCS (Societies of ComputeeS) Project: Aims at providing a computational logic model for the description, analysis and verification of global and open Societies of Heterogeneous ComputeeS. What is a computee?

SOCS 4 A Computee is interpreted as interactive agents with internal (mental) state consisting of –Knowledge base (or beliefs): This is the total knowledge that the computee has, –Goals: A set of goals that the computee has decided that it wants (desires), –Plans: These represents the “concrete” actions of the computee with which it plans (intends) to satisfy its goals.

SOCS 5 Interaction among computees may be –Adversarial: A computee competes against other computees in a society for its own goals. –Co-operative: Computees co-operate with each other for common goals in a society. A plan in SOCS is a conditional plan. (not surprise because of the uncertainty of interaction among computees) How to make a plan?

SOCS 6 Planning in SOCS Uncertainty: A Planer for a computee has to take other computees’ behaviours into consideration. Existing planers for uncertain domain is not enough because most of them deal with the situation where actions are uncertain. But in our case, the uncertainty comes from the interactions among computees. SOLUTION: Extends GraphPlan [Blum&Furst97] to deal with interactions.

SOCS 7 GraphPlan Overview[Blum&Furst97] What GraphPlan do? –STRIPS Domain Operator –Preconditions –Add-effects –Delete-effects Initial Conditions: Conjunction of facts. Goals: conjunction of Facts. –Find Partial-order Plans

SOCS 8 GraphPlan Overview(cont.) Planning Graph and its Expanding NO-OP... 0 ii+1 Delete a precondition With mutex preconditions – Mutex (mutual exclusive relation) Delete a effect Proposition Node Action Node Add edge Delete Edge Mutex actions Mutex propositions Precondition Edge i-1 P Q R S a R T b c U... e d

SOCS 9 GraphPlan Overview(cont.) Solution Extraction –If planning graph has proceeded to some propositional level at which all the goal facts are present and no pair of these is mutex. –Then extract a solution backtracking Assume S, T are all goal propositions. Then {b, d} and {c, d} are both local solutions. Select {b,d}, then {P, R} forms a new goal for next level. b a c d R Q P... T S

SOCS 10 GraphPlan Overview(cont.) Algorithm (High Level) While no plan is found Do –Graph-expansion phase: extend a planning graph forward until all goal facts are presented at last level. –Solution-extraction phase: search the resulting graph for a correct plan.

SOCS 11 GamePlan What GamePlan do –STRIPS-like Domain A set of agents (limited for two agents here) Operators: available for all agents Initial Condition An agent-specific Goal –Find a Conditional Plan

SOCS 12 Example (Tic Tac Toe) X O

SOCS 13 Example (cont.) Agents X, O for two players Operator mark(i, j, mark) ( 0<i, j <4, mark  {X, O}) precondition: blank(i, j) add effect: at(i, j, mark) delete effect:  blank(i, j)

SOCS 14 Example (cont.) Initial Condition: blank(1,1), blank(1,2), blank(1, 3), at(2, 2, X), at(2, 1, O), blank(2, 3), blank(3,1), blank(3,2), blank(3, 3) X O

SOCS 15 Example (cont.) Goal: wins(Me) which has definition wins(Me)  at(1,1,Me), at(1,2,Me), at(1,3, Me) wins(Me)  at(2,1,Me), at(2,2,Me), at(2,3, Me) wins(Me)  at(3,1,Me), at(3,2,Me), at(3, 3,Me) wins(Me)  at(1,1,Me), at(2,2,Me), at(3,3, Me) wins(Me)  at(1,3,Me), at(2,2,Me), at(3,1, Me) wins(Me)  at(1,1,Me), at(2,1,Me), at(3,1, Me) wins(Me)  at(1,2,Me), at(2,2,Me), at(2,3, Me) wins(Me)  at(1,3,Me), at(2,3,Me), at(3,3, Me)

SOCS 16 GamePlan (cont.) Extending Planning Graph –extend graph by agents alternatively –label each action level with the agent who owns control on the actions at the level. –An alternation is called a TURN. Bonus: share all properties of planning graph in GraphPlan.

SOCS 17 B 11 B 12 B 13 O 21 X 22 B 23 B 31 B 32 B 33 X 11 B 11 M 11X NO-OP B ij for blank(i,j) M ijx for mark(i,j,x) X ij for at(i,j,x) O ij for at(i,j,O) X O

SOCS 18 B ij for blank(i,j) M ijx for mark(i,j,x) X ij for at(i,j,x) X ij for at(i,j,O) B 11 M 11X X 11 NO-OP B 11 B 12 M 12 X X 12 NO-OP B 12 B 13 M 13X X 13 NO-OP B 13 O 21 NO-OP O 21 X 22 NO-OP O 21 B 23 M 23X X 23 NO-OP B 23 B 31 M 31X X 31 NO-OP B 31 B 32 M 32X X 32 NO-OP B 32 B 33 M 33 X X 33 NO-OP B 33 X X O

SOCS 19 B 11 M 11X X 11 NO-OP B 11 B 12 M 12 X X 12 NO-OP B 12 B 13 M 13X X 13 NO-OP B 13 O 21 NO-OP O 21 X 22 NO-OP O 21 B 23 M 23X X 23 NO-OP B 23 B 31 M 31X X 31 NO-OP B 31 B 32 M 32X X 32 NO-OP B 32 B 33 M 33 X X 33 NO-OP B 33 X X O O NO-OP X 11 M 11O B 11 O 11

SOCS 20

SOCS 21 GamePlan (cont.) Solution Extraction –Instead of level by level, it works turn-by-turn. –dynamically merge a turn to produce a set of conditional actions. –adapt a Conditional Planer to extract a local solution at a specific turn

SOCS 22 Merging a turn –Let (A, B) be a turn and a  A, b  B, we say a blocks b if execution of a will delete a precondition of b. –Merging a (  no-op) with level B, denoted by a + B, is a conditional action with the same precondition as a but a set of conditional effects {b':eff(a,b) | b’ is an unique label for b  B which is not blocked by a} where eff(a,b) = a’s effects that are not conflict with any effects of b  b’s effects.

SOCS 23 M 11X + L O Precondition: B 11 Post-condition: M 12O :  B 11  X 11   B 12  O 12 M 13O :  B 11  X 11   B 13  O 13 M 23O :  B 11  X 11   B 23  O 23 M 31O :  B 11  X 11   B 31  O 31 M 32O :  B 11  X 11   B 32  O 32 M 33O :  B 11  X 11   B 33  O 33 Example(cont.)

SOCS 24 Adapting a Conditional Planer In Principle, any conditional planer which can deal with conditional actions can be adapted for our purpose. What we need is – Introduce backtrack point. Bonus: Adapted conditional planer is much simple than the original one.

SOCS 25 Instantiate a Goal –X 11, X 12, X 13 are called open conditions which need to be resolved. Win(X) 1 X 11 X 22 X 33 Example (cont.)

SOCS 26 Win(X) 1 X 11 X 22 X 33 NO-OP Resolve Open Conditions: Add Causal Links –Causal link = (action, labels, openConditon) –Record backtrack point, several actions may used to resolve an open condition –Side effect: Add causal link may introduce conflicts. M 11X +L O {12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} M 11X + L O Precondition: B 11 Post-condition: M 12O :  B 11  X 11   B 12  O 12 M 13O :  B 11  X 11   B 13  O 1 M 23O :  B 11  X 11   B 23  O 23 M 31O :  B 11  X 11   B 31  O 31 M 32O :  B 11  X 11   B 32  O 32 M 33O :  B 11  X 11   B 33  O 33 M 33X +L O {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 32} M 33X + L O Precondition: B 33 Post-condition: M 11O :  B 33  X 33   B 11  O 11 M 12O :  B 33  X 33   B 12  O 12 M 13O :  B 33  X 33   B 13  O 13 M 23O :  B 33  X 33   B 23  O 23 M 31O :  B 33  X 33   B 31  O 31 M 32O :  B 33  X 33   B 32  O 32

SOCS 27 Win(X) 1 X 11 X 22 X 33 M 11X + L O {12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} NO-OP M 33X +L O {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 32} {33} Resolve Conflict: add conditional links –conditional link = (action 1, labels, action 2 ) –Side effect: add conditional link may cause open outcomes M 11X + L O Precondition: B 11 Post-condition: M 12O :  B 11  X 11   B 12  O 12 M 13O :  B 11  X 11   B 13  O 1 M 23O :  B 11  X 11   B 23  O 23 M 31O :  B 11  X 11   B 31  O 31 M 32O :  B 11  X 11   B 32  O 32 M 33O :  B 11  X 11   B 33  O 33 M 33X + L O Precondition: B 33 Post-condition: M 11O :  B 33  X 33   B 11  O 11 M 12O :  B 33  X 33   B 12  O 12 M 13O :  B 33  X 33   B 13  O 13 M 23O :  B 33  X 33   B 23  O 23 M 31O :  B 33  X 33   B 31  O 31 M 32O :  B 33  X 33   B 32  O 32

SOCS 28 Resolve Open Outcomes: Instantiate new goal –Side effect: Instantiate new goal may introduce open conditions Win(X) 2 X 13 X 12 X 11 M 11X +L O Win(X) 1 X 11 X 22 X 33 NO-OP M 33X +L O {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 32} { 33} { 12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} { 12} M 12X +L O {11, 13, 23, 31, 32,33} { 13} M 13X +L O {11, 12, 23, 31, 32, 33}

SOCS 29 Repeat the process until –no open conditions –no open outcomes M 33X +L O M 11X +L O Win(X) 1 X 11 X 22 X 33 { 12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} NO-OP {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 32} { 33} Win(X) 2 X 13 X 12 X 11 { 12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} M 12X +L O M 13X +L O { 12} {11, 13, 23, 31, 32,33} { 13} {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 33} Win(X) 3 X 32 X 22 X 12 NO-OP M 32X +L O {11, 12, 23, 31, 32, 33} {11, 13, 23, 31, 32,33} { 32} M 11 O 33 O 13  O 33 M 12 M 33 M 32 M 13  O 13 X O

SOCS 30 Preconditions of the actions in the local plan forms a new goal for the next turn. –If no plan for the new goal in the next turn, then backtrack. M 11X +L O Win(X) 1 X 11 X 22 X 33 { 12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} NO-OPM 33X +L O {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 32} { 33} Win(X) 2 X 13 X 12 X 11 { 12, 13, 23, 31, 32, 33} M 12X +L O M 13X +L O { 12} {11, 13, 23, 31, 32,33} { 13} {11, 12, 13, 23, 31, 33} Win(X) 3 X 32 X 22 X 12 NO-OP M 32X +L O {11, 12, 23, 31, 32, 33} {11, 13, 23, 31, 32,33} { 32} B 32 B 13 B 12 B 11 B 33

SOCS 31 Conclusion What we have done –A GamePlan framework –Adversarial planning algorithm What we are planning to do –refinement –implementation and test –exploit the idea to deal with co-operative planning.