AAAI-20061 of 20 Deconstructing Planning as Satisfiability Henry Kautz University of Rochester in collaboration with Bart Selman and Jöerg Hoffmann.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AAAI of 20 Deconstructing Planning as Satisfiability A Revised Report Henry Kautz UW University of Rochester in collaboration with Bart Selman and.
Advertisements

Planning Module THREE: Planning, Production Systems,Expert Systems, Uncertainty Dr M M Awais.
State Transition Systems  linear planning  bounded model checking  conditional planning  model checking  state transition description languages: oPDDL.
Dana Nau: Lecture slides for Automated Planning Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License:
1 Backdoor Sets in SAT Instances Ryan Williams Carnegie Mellon University Joint work in IJCAI03 with: Carla Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University.
Planning as Satisfiability cse 473 sp 06. SATPLAN cnf formula satisfying model plan mapping length STRIPS problem description SAT engine encoder interpreter.
Programming with Constraints Jia-Huai You. Subject of Study Constraint Programming (CP) studies the computational models, languages, and systems for solving.
Ryan Kinworthy 2/26/20031 Chapter 7- Local Search part 1 Ryan Kinworthy CSCE Advanced Constraint Processing.
CSE 5731 Lecture 19 Reasoning about Time and Change CSE 573 Artificial Intelligence I Henry Kautz Fall 2001 Salvador Dali, Persistence of Memory.
CSE 5731 Lecture 21 State-Space Search vs. Constraint- Based Planning CSE 573 Artificial Intelligence I Henry Kautz Fall 2001.
1 Planning. R. Dearden 2007/8 Exam Format  4 questions You must do all questions There is choice within some of the questions  Learning Outcomes: 1.Explain.
1 Towards Efficient Sampling: Exploiting Random Walk Strategy Wei Wei, Jordan Erenrich, and Bart Selman.
1 Backdoors To Typical Case Complexity Ryan Williams Carnegie Mellon University Joint work with: Carla Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University.
1 BLACKBOX: A New Paradigm for Planning Bart Selman Cornell University.
Encoding Domain Knowledge in the Planning as Satisfiability Framework Bart Selman Cornell University.
1 BLACKBOX: A New Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving Bart Selman Cornell University Joint work with Henry Kautz AT&T Labs.
Reviving Integer Programming Approaches for AI Planning: A Branch-and-Cut Framework Thomas Vossen Leeds School of Business University of Colorado at Boulder.
Knowledge Representation II (Inference in Propositional Logic) CSE 473 Continued…
Classical Planning via State-space search COMP3431 Malcolm Ryan.
Ryan Kinworthy 2/26/20031 Chapter 7- Local Search part 2 Ryan Kinworthy CSCE Advanced Constraint Processing.
1 Combinatorial Problems in Cooperative Control: Complexity and Scalability Carla Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University Muri Meeting March 2002.
Sampling Combinatorial Space Using Biased Random Walks Jordan Erenrich, Wei Wei and Bart Selman Dept. of Computer Science Cornell University.
Relaxed DPLL Search for MaxSAT (short paper) Lukas Kroc, Ashish Sabharwal, Bart Selman Cornell University SAT-09 Conference Swansea, U.K. July 3, 2009.
1 Exploiting Random Walk Strategies in Reasoning Wei.
Planning as Satisfiability CS Outline 0. Overview of Planning 1. Modeling and Solving Planning Problems as SAT - SATPLAN 2. Improved Encodings using.
The Role of Domain-Specific Knowledge in the Planning as Satisfiability Framework Henry Kautz AT&T Labs Bart Selman Cornell University.
CS444-Autumn of 20 Planning as Satisfiability Henry Kautz University of Rochester in collaboration with Bart Selman and Jöerg Hoffmann.
Logical Foundations of AI Planning as Satisfiability Clause Learning Backdoors to Hardness Henry Kautz.
ANTs PI meeting, May 29-31, 2002Washington University / DCMP1 Flexible Methods for Multi-agent Distributed Resource Allocation by Exploiting Phase Transitions.
1 MCMC Style Sampling / Counting for SAT Can we extend SAT/CSP techniques to solve harder counting/sampling problems? Such an extension would lead us to.
Performing Bayesian Inference by Weighted Model Counting Tian Sang, Paul Beame, and Henry Kautz Department of Computer Science & Engineering University.
IBM Labs in Haifa © Copyright IBM SVRH: Non-local stochastic CSP solver with learning of high-level topography characteristics Yehuda Naveh Simulation.
Large-scale Hybrid Parallel SAT Solving Nishant Totla, Aditya Devarakonda, Sanjit Seshia.
Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSPs) CPSC 322 – CSP 1 Poole & Mackworth textbook: Sections § Lecturer: Alan Mackworth September 28, 2012.
1 The LPSAT Engine and its Application to Metric Planning Steve Wolfman University of Washington CS&E Advisor: Dan Weld.
Open-Loop Planning as Satisfiability Henry Kautz AT&T Labs.
Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction Problems by Carla P. Gomes, Bart Selman, Nuno Crato and henry Kautz Presented by Yunho.
Planning as Propositional Satisfiabililty Brian C. Williams Oct. 30 th, J/6.834J GSAT, Graphplan and WalkSAT Based on slides from Bart Selman.
Explorations in Artificial Intelligence Prof. Carla P. Gomes Module Logic Representations.
Combining Component Caching and Clause Learning for Effective Model Counting Tian Sang University of Washington Fahiem Bacchus (U Toronto), Paul Beame.
CS 5411 Compilation Approaches to AI Planning 1 José Luis Ambite* Some slides are taken from presentations by Kautz and Selman. Please visit their.
Boolean Satisfiability Present and Future
AI Lecture 17 Planning Noémie Elhadad (substituting for Prof. McKeown)
SAT 2009 Ashish Sabharwal Backdoors in the Context of Learning (short paper) Bistra Dilkina, Carla P. Gomes, Ashish Sabharwal Cornell University SAT-09.
© Daniel S. Weld 1 Logistics Problem Set 2 Due Wed A few KR problems Robocode 1.Form teams of 2 people 2.Write design document.
Dana Nau: Lecture slides for Automated Planning Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License:
Solving Finite Domain Hierarchical Constraint Optimization Problems By Lua Seet Chong Supervised By A.P. Martin Henz 9th March 2001.
Eliminating non- binary constraints Toby Walsh Cork Constraint Computation Center.
Planning 2 (SATPLAN) CSE 573. © Daniel S. Weld 2 Ways to make “plans” Generative Planning Reason from first principles (knowledge of actions) Requires.
Local Search Methods for SAT Geoffrey Levine March 11, 2004.
Inference in Propositional Logic (and Intro to SAT) CSE 473.
By J. Hoffmann and B. Nebel
Dana Nau: Lecture slides for Automated Planning Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License:
1 P NP P^#P PSPACE NP-complete: SAT, propositional reasoning, scheduling, graph coloring, puzzles, … PSPACE-complete: QBF, planning, chess (bounded), …
Inference in Propositional Logic (and Intro to SAT)
CS 4700: Foundations of Artificial Intelligence
Planning as Satisfiability
Planning as Search State Space Plan Space Algorihtm Progression
EA C461 – Artificial Intelligence Logical Agent
Markov Logic Networks for NLP CSCI-GA.2591
Local Search Strategies: From N-Queens to Walksat
Class #17 – Thursday, October 27
CSE P573 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence Class 1 Planning & Search INTRODUCE MYSELF Relative new faculty member, but 20 years in AI research.
Planning as Satisfiability with Blackbox
Graphplan/ SATPlan Chapter
Planning as Satisfiability
Emergence of Intelligent Machines: Challenges and Opportunities
Class #19 – Monday, November 3
Graphplan/ SATPlan Chapter
Graphplan/ SATPlan Chapter
Presentation transcript:

AAAI of 20 Deconstructing Planning as Satisfiability Henry Kautz University of Rochester in collaboration with Bart Selman and Jöerg Hoffmann

AAAI of 20 AI Planning Two traditions of research in planning: –Planning as general inference (McCarthy 1969) Important task is modeling –Planning as human behavior (Newell & Simon 1972) Important task is to develop search strategies

AAAI of 20 Satplan Model planning as Boolean satisfiability –(Kautz & Selman 1992): Hard structured benchmarks for SAT solvers –Pushing the envelope: planning, propositional logic, and stochastic search (1996) Can outperform best current planning systems Satplan (satz)Graphplan (IPP) log.a5 sec31 min log.b7 sec13 min log.c9 sec> 4 hours

AAAI of 20 Satplan in 15 Seconds Time = bounded sequence of integers Translate planning operators to propositional schemas that assert:

AAAI of 20 International Planning Competition IPC-1998: Satplan (blackbox) is competitive

AAAI of 20 International Planning Competition IPC-2000: Satplan did poorly Satplan

AAAI of 20 International Planning Competition IPC-2002: we stayed home. Jeb Bush

AAAI of 20 International Planning Competition IPC-2004: 1 st place, Optimal Planning –Best on 5 of 7 domains –2 nd best on remaining 2 domains PROLEMA / philosophers

AAAI of 20 International Planning Competition IPC-2006: Tied for 1 st place, Optimal Planning –Other winner, MAXPLAN, is a variant of Satplan! CPT2MIPS-BDDSATPLANMaxplanFDP Propositional Domains (1 st / 2 nd Places) 0 / 11 / 13 / 2 0 / 3 Temporal Domains (1 st / 2 nd Places) 2 / 0

AAAI of 20 What Changed? Small change in modeling –Modest improvement from 2004 to 2006 Significant change in SAT solvers!

AAAI of 20 What Changed? In 2004, competition introduced the optimal planning track –Optimal planning is a very different beast from non- optimal planning! –In many domains, it is almost trivial to find poor- quality solutions by backtrack-free search! E.g.: solutions to multi-airplane logistics planning problems found by heuristic state-space planners typically used only a single airplane! –See: Local Search Topology in Planning Benchmarks: A Theoretical Analysis (Hoffmann 2002)

AAAI of 20 Why Care About Optimal Planning? Real users want (near)-optimal plans! –Industrial applications: assembly planning, resource planning, logistics planning… –Difference between optimal and merely feasible solutions can be worth millions of dollars Alternative: fast domain-specific approximation algorithms that provide near-optimal solutions –Approximation algorithms for job shop scheduling –Blocks World Tamed: Ten Thousand Blocks in Under a Second (Slaney & Thiébaux 1995)

AAAI of 20 Domain-Independent Heuristic Planning Considered Harmful Solution Quality? Speed? Optimal planning algorithms BestModerate Domain-specific algorithms HighFast Domain-independent heuristic planning PoorHard to predict

AAAI of 20 Objections Real-world planning cares about optimizing resources, not just make-span, and Satplan cannot handle numeric resources –We can extend Satplan to handle numeric constraints –One approach: use hybrid SAT/LP solver (Wolfman & Weld 1999) –Modeling as ordinary Boolean SAT is often surprisingly efficient! (Hoffmann, Kautz, Gomes, & Selman, under review)

AAAI of 20 Objections If speed is crucial, you still must use heuristic planners –For highly constrained planning problems, optimal planning is often faster than heuristic planning!

AAAI of 20 Constrainedness: Run Time

AAAI of 20 Constrainedness: Percent Solved

AAAI of 20 Further Extensions to Satplan Probabilistic planning –Translation to stochastic satisfiability (Majercik & Littman 1998) –Translation to weighted model-counting (Hoffmann 2006) Solved by modified DPLL solver, Cachet (Sang, Beame, & Kautz 2005) Competitive with best probabilistic planners

AAAI of 20 One More Objection! Satplan-like approaches cannot handle domains that are too large to fully instantiate –Solution: SAT solvers with lazy instantiation –Lazy Walksat (Singla & Domingos 2006) Nearly all instantiated propositions are false Nearly all instantiated clauses are true Modify Walksat to only keep false clauses and a list of true propositions in memory

AAAI of 20 Summary Satisfiability testing is a vital line of research in AI planning –Dramatic progress in SAT solvers –Recognition of distinct and important nature of optimal planning Not restricted to STRIPS any more! –Numeric constraints –Probabilistic planning –Large domains