Showing 1–20 of 20 results for author: Edelkamp, S

CLIP-Motion: Learning Reward Functions for Robotic Actions Using Consecutive Observations

Authors: Xuzhe Dang, Stefan Edelkamp, Nicolas Ribault

Abstract: This paper presents a novel method for learning reward functions for robotic motions by harnessing the power of a CLIP-based model. Traditional reward function design often hinges on manual feature engineering, which can struggle to generalize across an array of tasks. Our approach circumvents this challenge by capitalizing on CLIP's capability to process both state features and image inputs effec… ▽ More This paper presents a novel method for learning reward functions for robotic motions by harnessing the power of a CLIP-based model. Traditional reward function design often hinges on manual feature engineering, which can struggle to generalize across an array of tasks. Our approach circumvents this challenge by capitalizing on CLIP's capability to process both state features and image inputs effectively. Given a pair of consecutive observations, our model excels in identifying the motion executed between them. We showcase results spanning various robotic activities, such as directing a gripper to a designated target and adjusting the position of a cube. Through experimental evaluations, we underline the proficiency of our method in precisely deducing motion and its promise to enhance reinforcement learning training in the realm of robotics. △ Less

Submitted 6 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Optimize Planning Heuristics to Rank, not to Estimate Cost-to-Goal

Authors: Leah Chrestien, Tomás Pevný, Stefan Edelkamp, Antonín Komenda

Abstract: In imitation learning for planning, parameters of heuristic functions are optimized against a set of solved problem instances. This work revisits the necessary and sufficient conditions of strictly optimally efficient heuristics for forward search algorithms, mainly A* and greedy best-first search, which expand only states on the returned optimal path. It then proposes a family of loss functions b… ▽ More In imitation learning for planning, parameters of heuristic functions are optimized against a set of solved problem instances. This work revisits the necessary and sufficient conditions of strictly optimally efficient heuristics for forward search algorithms, mainly A* and greedy best-first search, which expand only states on the returned optimal path. It then proposes a family of loss functions based on ranking tailored for a given variant of the forward search algorithm. Furthermore, from a learning theory point of view, it discusses why optimizing cost-to-goal \hstar\ is unnecessarily difficult. The experimental comparison on a diverse set of problems unequivocally supports the derived theory. △ Less

Submitted 30 October, 2023; originally announced October 2023.

Comments: 10 pages

A Differentiable Loss Function for Learning Heuristics in A*

Authors: Leah Chrestien, Tomas Pevny, Antonin Komenda, Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: Optimization of heuristic functions for the A* algorithm, realized by deep neural networks, is usually done by minimizing square root loss of estimate of the cost to goal values. This paper argues that this does not necessarily lead to a faster search of A* algorithm since its execution relies on relative values instead of absolute ones. As a mitigation, we propose a L* loss, which upper-bounds th… ▽ More Optimization of heuristic functions for the A* algorithm, realized by deep neural networks, is usually done by minimizing square root loss of estimate of the cost to goal values. This paper argues that this does not necessarily lead to a faster search of A* algorithm since its execution relies on relative values instead of absolute ones. As a mitigation, we propose a L* loss, which upper-bounds the number of excessively expanded states inside the A* search. The L* loss, when used in the optimization of state-of-the-art deep neural networks for automated planning in maze domains like Sokoban and maze with teleports, significantly improves the fraction of solved problems, the quality of founded plans, and reduces the number of expanded states to approximately 50% △ Less

Submitted 12 September, 2022; originally announced September 2022.

Comments: 10 pages

Heuristic Search Planning with Deep Neural Networks using Imitation, Attention and Curriculum Learning

Authors: Leah Chrestien, Tomas Pevny, Antonin Komenda, Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: Learning a well-informed heuristic function for hard task planning domains is an elusive problem. Although there are known neural network architectures to represent such heuristic knowledge, it is not obvious what concrete information is learned and whether techniques aimed at understanding the structure help in improving the quality of the heuristics. This paper presents a network model to learn… ▽ More Learning a well-informed heuristic function for hard task planning domains is an elusive problem. Although there are known neural network architectures to represent such heuristic knowledge, it is not obvious what concrete information is learned and whether techniques aimed at understanding the structure help in improving the quality of the heuristics. This paper presents a network model to learn a heuristic capable of relating distant parts of the state space via optimal plan imitation using the attention mechanism, which drastically improves the learning of a good heuristic function. To counter the limitation of the method in the creation of problems of increasing difficulty, we demonstrate the use of curriculum learning, where newly solved problem instances are added to the training set, which, in turn, helps to solve problems of higher complexities and far exceeds the performances of all existing baselines including classical planning heuristics. We demonstrate its effectiveness for grid-type PDDL domains. △ Less

Submitted 3 December, 2021; originally announced December 2021.

Comments: 8 pages plus references

Knowledge-Based Paranoia Search in Trick-Taking

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: This paper proposes \emph{knowledge-based paraonoia search} (KBPS) to find forced wins during trick-taking in the card game Skat; for some one of the most interesting card games for three players. It combines efficient partial information game-tree search with knowledge representation and reasoning. This worst-case analysis, initiated after a small number of tricks, leads to a prioritized choice o… ▽ More This paper proposes \emph{knowledge-based paraonoia search} (KBPS) to find forced wins during trick-taking in the card game Skat; for some one of the most interesting card games for three players. It combines efficient partial information game-tree search with knowledge representation and reasoning. This worst-case analysis, initiated after a small number of tricks, leads to a prioritized choice of cards. We provide variants of KBPS for the declarer and the opponents, and an approximation to find a forced win against most worlds in the belief space. Replaying thousands of expert games, our evaluation indicates that the AIs with the new algorithms perform better than humans in their play, achieving an average score of over 1,000 points in the agreed standard for evaluating Skat tournaments, the extended Seeger system. △ Less

Submitted 7 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

ELO System for Skat and Other Games of Chance

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: Assessing the skill level of players to predict the outcome and to rank the players in a longer series of games is of critical importance for tournament play. Besides weaknesses, like an observed continuous inflation, through a steadily increasing playing body, the ELO ranking system, named after its creator Arpad Elo, has proven to be a reliable method for calculating the relative skill levels of… ▽ More Assessing the skill level of players to predict the outcome and to rank the players in a longer series of games is of critical importance for tournament play. Besides weaknesses, like an observed continuous inflation, through a steadily increasing playing body, the ELO ranking system, named after its creator Arpad Elo, has proven to be a reliable method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in zero-sum games. The evaluation of player strength in trick-taking card games like Skat or Bridge, however, is not obvious. Firstly, these are incomplete information partially observable games with more than one player, where opponent strength should influence the scoring as it does in existing ELO systems. Secondly, they are game of both skill and chance, so that besides the playing strength the outcome of a game also depends on the deal. Last but not least, there are internationally established scoring systems, in which the players are used to be evaluated, and to which ELO should align. Based on a tournament scoring system, we propose a new ELO system for Skat to overcome these weaknesses. △ Less

Submitted 7 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

On the Power of Refined Skat Selection

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: Skat is a fascinating combinatorial card game, show-casing many of the intrinsic challenges for modern AI systems such as cooperative and adversarial behaviors (among the players), randomness (in the deal), and partial knowledge (due to hidden cards). Given the larger number of tricks and higher degree of uncertainty, reinforcement learning is less effective compared to classical board games like… ▽ More Skat is a fascinating combinatorial card game, show-casing many of the intrinsic challenges for modern AI systems such as cooperative and adversarial behaviors (among the players), randomness (in the deal), and partial knowledge (due to hidden cards). Given the larger number of tricks and higher degree of uncertainty, reinforcement learning is less effective compared to classical board games like Chess and Go. As within the game of Bridge, in Skat we have a bidding and trick-taking stage. Prior to the trick-taking and as part of the bidding process, one phase in the game is to select two skat cards, whose quality may influence subsequent playing performance drastically. This paper looks into different skat selection strategies. Besides predicting the probability of winning and other hand strength functions we propose hard expert-rules and a scoring functions based on refined skat evaluation features. Experiments emphasize the impact of the refined skat putting algorithm on the playing performance of the bots, especially for AI bidding and AI game selection. △ Less

Submitted 7 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

QuickXsort - A Fast Sorting Scheme in Theory and Practice

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Armin Weiß, Sebastian Wild

Abstract: QuickXsort is a highly efficient in-place sequential sorting scheme that mixes Hoare's Quicksort algorithm with X, where X can be chosen from a wider range of other known sorting algorithms, like Heapsort, Insertionsort and Mergesort. Its major advantage is that QuickXsort can be in-place even if X is not. In this work we provide general transfer theorems expressing the number of comparisons of Qu… ▽ More QuickXsort is a highly efficient in-place sequential sorting scheme that mixes Hoare's Quicksort algorithm with X, where X can be chosen from a wider range of other known sorting algorithms, like Heapsort, Insertionsort and Mergesort. Its major advantage is that QuickXsort can be in-place even if X is not. In this work we provide general transfer theorems expressing the number of comparisons of QuickXsort in terms of the number of comparisons of X. More specifically, if pivots are chosen as medians of (not too fast) growing size samples, the average number of comparisons of QuickXsort and X differ only by $o(n)$-terms. For median-of-$k$ pivot selection for some constant $k$, the difference is a linear term whose coefficient we compute precisely. For instance, median-of-three QuickMergesort uses at most $n \lg n - 0.8358n + O(\log n)$ comparisons. Furthermore, we examine the possibility of sorting base cases with some other algorithm using even less comparisons. By doing so the average-case number of comparisons can be reduced down to $n \lg n- 1.4106n + o(n)$ for a remaining gap of only $0.0321n$ comparisons to the known lower bound (while using only $O(\log n)$ additional space and $O(n \log n)$ time overall). Implementations of these sorting strategies show that the algorithms challenge well-established library implementations like Musser's Introsort. △ Less

Submitted 3 November, 2018; originally announced November 2018.

Worst-Case Efficient Sorting with QuickMergesort

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Armin Weiß

Abstract: The two most prominent solutions for the sorting problem are Quicksort and Mergesort. While Quicksort is very fast on average, Mergesort additionally gives worst-case guarantees, but needs extra space for a linear number of elements. Worst-case efficient in-place sorting, however, remains a challenge: the standard solution, Heapsort, suffers from a bad cache behavior and is also not overly fast fo… ▽ More The two most prominent solutions for the sorting problem are Quicksort and Mergesort. While Quicksort is very fast on average, Mergesort additionally gives worst-case guarantees, but needs extra space for a linear number of elements. Worst-case efficient in-place sorting, however, remains a challenge: the standard solution, Heapsort, suffers from a bad cache behavior and is also not overly fast for in-cache instances. In this work we present median-of-medians QuickMergesort (MoMQuickMergesort), a new variant of QuickMergesort, which combines Quicksort with Mergesort allowing the latter to be implemented in place. Our new variant applies the median-of-medians algorithm for selecting pivots in order to circumvent the quadratic worst case. Indeed, we show that it uses at most $n \log n + 1.6n$ comparisons for $n$ large enough. We experimentally confirm the theoretical estimates and show that the new algorithm outperforms Heapsort by far and is only around 10% slower than Introsort (std::sort implementation of stdlibc++), which has a rather poor guarantee for the worst case. We also simulate the worst case, which is only around 10% slower than the average case. In particular, the new algorithm is a natural candidate to replace Heapsort as a worst-case stopper in Introsort. △ Less

Submitted 2 November, 2018; originally announced November 2018.

ACM Class: F.2.2

QuickMergesort: Practically Efficient Constant-Factor Optimal Sorting

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Armin Weiß

Abstract: We consider the fundamental problem of internally sorting a sequence of $n$ elements. In its best theoretical setting QuickMergesort, a combination Quicksort with Mergesort with a Median-of-$\sqrt{n}$ pivot selection, requires at most $n \log n - 1.3999n + o(n)$ element comparisons on the average. The questions addressed in this paper is how to make this algorithm practical. As refined pivot selec… ▽ More We consider the fundamental problem of internally sorting a sequence of $n$ elements. In its best theoretical setting QuickMergesort, a combination Quicksort with Mergesort with a Median-of-$\sqrt{n}$ pivot selection, requires at most $n \log n - 1.3999n + o(n)$ element comparisons on the average. The questions addressed in this paper is how to make this algorithm practical. As refined pivot selection usually adds much overhead, we show that the Median-of-3 pivot selection of QuickMergesort leads to at most $n \log n - 0{.}75n + o(n)$ element comparisons on average, while running fast on elementary data. The experiments show that QuickMergesort outperforms state-of-the-art library implementations, including C++'s Introsort and Java's Dual-Pivot Quicksort. Further trade-offs between a low running time and a low number of comparisons are studied. Moreover, we describe a practically efficient version with $n \log n + O(n)$ comparisons in the worst case. △ Less

Submitted 26 April, 2018; originally announced April 2018.

ACM Class: F.2.2

BlockQuicksort: How Branch Mispredictions don't affect Quicksort

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Armin Weiß

Abstract: Since the work of Kaligosi and Sanders (2006), it is well-known that Quicksort -- which is commonly considered as one of the fastest in-place sorting algorithms -- suffers in an essential way from branch mispredictions. We present a novel approach to address this problem by partially decoupling control from data flow: in order to perform the partitioning, we split the input in blocks of constant s… ▽ More Since the work of Kaligosi and Sanders (2006), it is well-known that Quicksort -- which is commonly considered as one of the fastest in-place sorting algorithms -- suffers in an essential way from branch mispredictions. We present a novel approach to address this problem by partially decoupling control from data flow: in order to perform the partitioning, we split the input in blocks of constant size (we propose 128 data elements); then, all elements in one block are compared with the pivot and the outcomes of the comparisons are stored in a buffer. In a second pass, the respective elements are rearranged. By doing so, we avoid conditional branches based on outcomes of comparisons at all (except for the final Insertionsort). Moreover, we prove that for a static branch predictor the average total number of branch mispredictions is at most $εn \log n + O(n)$ for some small $ε$ depending on the block size when sorting $n$ elements. Our experimental results are promising: when sorting random integer data, we achieve an increase in speed of 80% over the GCC implementation of C++ std::sort. Also for many other types of data and non-random inputs, there is still a significant speedup over std::sort. Only in few special cases like sorted or almost sorted inputs, std::sort can beat out implementation. Moreover, even on random input permutations, our implementation is even slightly faster than an implementation of the highly tuned Super Scalar Sample Sort, which uses a linear amount of additional space. △ Less

Submitted 23 June, 2016; v1 submitted 22 April, 2016; originally announced April 2016.

ACM Class: F.2.2

Proceedings 3rd Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering

Authors: Dragan Bošnački, Stefan Edelkamp, Alberto Lluch Lafuente, Anton Wijs

Abstract: These are the proceedings of the Third Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering (GRAPHITE 2014), which took place on April 5, 2014 in Grenoble, France, as a satellite event of the 17th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2014). The aim of GRAPHITE is to foster the convergence on research interests from several communities dealing with graph analysi… ▽ More These are the proceedings of the Third Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering (GRAPHITE 2014), which took place on April 5, 2014 in Grenoble, France, as a satellite event of the 17th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2014). The aim of GRAPHITE is to foster the convergence on research interests from several communities dealing with graph analysis in all its forms in computer science, with a particular attention to software development and analysis. Graphs are used to represent data and processes in many application areas, and they are subjected to various computational algorithms in order to analyze them. Just restricting the attention to the analysis of software, graph analysis algorithms are used, for instance, to verify properties using model checking techniques that explore the system's state space graph or static analysis techniques based on control flow graphs. Further application domains include games, planning, and network analysis. Very often, graph problems and their algorithmic solutions have common characteristics, independent of their application domain. The goal of this event is to gather scientists from different communities, who do research on graph analysis algorithms, such that awareness of each others' work is increased. More information can be found at http://sysma.imtlucca.it/graphite. △ Less

Submitted 29 July, 2014; originally announced July 2014.

ACM Class: D.2.4; I.2.8

Journal ref: EPTCS 159, 2014

Strengthened Lazy Heaps: Surpassing the Lower Bounds for Binary Heaps

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Jyrki Katajainen, Amr Elmasry

Abstract: Let $n$ denote the number of elements currently in a data structure. An in-place heap is stored in the first $n$ locations of an array, uses $O(1)$ extra space, and supports the operations: minimum, insert, and extract-min. We introduce an in-place heap, for which minimum and insert take $O(1)$ worst-case time, and extract-min takes $O(\lg{} n)$ worst-case time and involves at most… ▽ More Let $n$ denote the number of elements currently in a data structure. An in-place heap is stored in the first $n$ locations of an array, uses $O(1)$ extra space, and supports the operations: minimum, insert, and extract-min. We introduce an in-place heap, for which minimum and insert take $O(1)$ worst-case time, and extract-min takes $O(\lg{} n)$ worst-case time and involves at most $\lg{} n + O(1)$ element comparisons. The achieved bounds are optimal to within additive constant terms for the number of element comparisons. In particular, these bounds for both insert and extract-min -and the time bound for insert- surpass the corresponding lower bounds known for binary heaps, though our data structure is similar. In a binary heap, when viewed as a nearly complete binary tree, every node other than the root obeys the heap property, i.e. the element at a node is not smaller than that at its parent. To surpass the lower bound for extract-min, we reinforce a stronger property at the bottom levels of the heap that the element at any right child is not smaller than that at its left sibling. To surpass the lower bound for insert, we buffer insertions and allow $O(\lg^2{} n)$ nodes to violate heap order in relation to their parents. △ Less

Submitted 12 July, 2014; originally announced July 2014.

Proceedings 2nd Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering

Authors: Anton Wijs, Dragan Bošnački, Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: These are the proceedings of the Second Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering (GRAPHITE 2013), which took place on March 24, 2013 in Rome, Italy, as a satellite event of the 16th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2013). The topic of the GRAPHITE workshop is graph analysis in all its forms in computer science. Graphs are used to represent data i… ▽ More These are the proceedings of the Second Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering (GRAPHITE 2013), which took place on March 24, 2013 in Rome, Italy, as a satellite event of the 16th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2013). The topic of the GRAPHITE workshop is graph analysis in all its forms in computer science. Graphs are used to represent data in many application areas, and they are subjected to various computational algorithms in order to acquire the desired information. These graph algorithms tend to have common characteristics, such as duplicate detection to guarantee their termination, independent of their application domain. Over the past few years, it has been shown that the scalability of such algorithms can be dramatically improved by using, e.g., external memory, by exploiting parallel architectures, such as clusters, multi-core CPUs, and graphics processing units, and by using heuristics to guide the search. Novel techniques to further scale graph search algorithms, and new applications of graph search are within the scope of this workshop. Another topic of interest of the event is more related to the structural properties of graphs: which kind of graph characteristics are relevant for a particular application area, and how can these be measured? Finally, any novel way of using graphs for a particular application area is on topic. The goal of this event is to gather scientists from different communities, such as model checking, artificial intelligence planning, game playing, and algorithm engineering, who do research on graph search algorithms, such that awareness of each others' work is increased. △ Less

Submitted 26 December, 2013; originally announced December 2013.

ACM Class: D.2.4; E.1; F.2.2

Journal ref: EPTCS 138, 2013

QuickXsort: Efficient Sorting with n log n - 1.399n +o(n) Comparisons on Average

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Armin Weiß

Abstract: In this paper we generalize the idea of QuickHeapsort leading to the notion of QuickXsort. Given some external sorting algorithm X, QuickXsort yields an internal sorting algorithm if X satisfies certain natural conditions. With QuickWeakHeapsort and QuickMergesort we present two examples for the QuickXsort-construction. Both are efficient algorithms that incur approximately n log n - 1.26n +o(n)… ▽ More In this paper we generalize the idea of QuickHeapsort leading to the notion of QuickXsort. Given some external sorting algorithm X, QuickXsort yields an internal sorting algorithm if X satisfies certain natural conditions. With QuickWeakHeapsort and QuickMergesort we present two examples for the QuickXsort-construction. Both are efficient algorithms that incur approximately n log n - 1.26n +o(n) comparisons on the average. A worst case of n log n + O(n) comparisons can be achieved without significantly affecting the average case. Furthermore, we describe an implementation of MergeInsertion for small n. Taking MergeInsertion as a base case for QuickMergesort, we establish a worst-case efficient sorting algorithm calling for n log n - 1.3999n + o(n) comparisons on average. QuickMergesort with constant size base cases shows the best performance on practical inputs: when sorting integers it is slower by only 15% to STL-Introsort. △ Less

Submitted 11 July, 2013; originally announced July 2013.

ACM Class: F.2.2

Lex-Partitioning: A New Option for BDD Search

Authors: Stefan Edelkamp, Peter Kissmann, Álvaro Torralba

Abstract: For the exploration of large state spaces, symbolic search using binary decision diagrams (BDDs) can save huge amounts of memory and computation time. State sets are represented and modified by accessing and manipulating their characteristic functions. BDD partitioning is used to compute the image as the disjunction of smaller subimages. In this paper, we propose a novel BDD partitioning option.… ▽ More For the exploration of large state spaces, symbolic search using binary decision diagrams (BDDs) can save huge amounts of memory and computation time. State sets are represented and modified by accessing and manipulating their characteristic functions. BDD partitioning is used to compute the image as the disjunction of smaller subimages. In this paper, we propose a novel BDD partitioning option. The partitioning is lexicographical in the binary representation of the states contained in the set that is represented by a BDD and uniform with respect to the number of states represented. The motivation of controlling the state set sizes in the partitioning is to eventually bridge the gap between explicit and symbolic search. Let n be the size of the binary state vector. We propose an O(n) ranking and unranking scheme that supports negated edges and operates on top of precomputed satcount values. For the uniform split of a BDD, we then use unranking to provide paths along which we partition the BDDs. In a shared BDD representation the efforts are O(n). The algorithms are fully integrated in the CUDD library and evaluated in strongly solving general game playing benchmarks. △ Less

Submitted 23 October, 2012; originally announced October 2012.

Comments: In Proceedings GRAPHITE 2012, arXiv:1210.6118

Journal ref: EPTCS 99, 2012, pp. 66-82

Proceedings First Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering

Authors: Anton Wijs, Dragan Bošnački, Stefan Edelkamp

Abstract: These are the proceedings of the First Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering (GRAPHITE 2012), which took place on April 1, 2012 in Tallinn, Estonia, as a satellite event of the 15th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2012). The topic of the GRAPHITE workshop is graph search in all its forms in computer science. Graph search algorithms tend to ha… ▽ More These are the proceedings of the First Workshop on GRAPH Inspection and Traversal Engineering (GRAPHITE 2012), which took place on April 1, 2012 in Tallinn, Estonia, as a satellite event of the 15th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS 2012). The topic of the GRAPHITE workshop is graph search in all its forms in computer science. Graph search algorithms tend to have common characteristics, such as duplicate state detection, independent of their application domain. Over the past few years, it has been shown that the scalability of such algorithms can be dramatically improved by using, e.g., external memory, by exploiting parallel architectures, such as clusters, multi-core CPUs, and graphics processing units, and by using heuristics to guide the search. The goal of this event is to gather scientists from different communities, such as model checking, artificial intelligence planning, game playing, and algorithm engineering, who do research on graph search algorithms, such that awareness of each others' work is increased. △ Less

Submitted 22 October, 2012; originally announced October 2012.

ACM Class: D.1.3; D.2.4; G.2.2; I.2.8

Journal ref: EPTCS 99, 2012

Engineering Benchmarks for Planning: the Domains Used in the Deterministic Part of IPC-4

Authors: S. Edelkamp, R. Englert, J. Hoffmann, F. Liporace, S. Thiebaux, S. Trueg

Abstract: In a field of research about general reasoning mechanisms, it is essential to have appropriate benchmarks. Ideally, the benchmarks should reflect possible applications of the developed technology. In AI Planning, researchers more and more tend to draw their testing examples from the benchmark collections used in the International Planning Competition (IPC). In the organization of (the deterministi… ▽ More In a field of research about general reasoning mechanisms, it is essential to have appropriate benchmarks. Ideally, the benchmarks should reflect possible applications of the developed technology. In AI Planning, researchers more and more tend to draw their testing examples from the benchmark collections used in the International Planning Competition (IPC). In the organization of (the deterministic part of) the fourth IPC, IPC-4, the authors therefore invested significant effort to create a useful set of benchmarks. They come from five different (potential) real-world applications of planning: airport ground traffic control, oil derivative transportation in pipeline networks, model-checking safety properties, power supply restoration, and UMTS call setup. Adapting and preparing such an application for use as a benchmark in the IPC involves, at the time, inevitable (often drastic) simplifications, as well as careful choice between, and engineering of, domain encodings. For the first time in the IPC, we used compilations to formulate complex domain features in simple languages such as STRIPS, rather than just drop** the more interesting problem constraints in the simpler language subsets. The article explains and discusses the five application domains and their adaptation to form the PDDL test suites used in IPC-4. We summarize known theoretical results on structural properties of the domains, regarding their computational complexity and provable properties of their topology under the h+ function (an idealized version of the relaxed plan heuristic). We present new (empirical) results illuminating properties such as the quality of the most wide-spread heuristic functions (planning graph, serial planning graph, and relaxed plan), the growth of propositional representations over instance size, and the number of actions available to achieve each fact; we discuss these data in conjunction with the best results achieved by the different kinds of planners participating in IPC-4. △ Less

Submitted 29 September, 2011; originally announced October 2011.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 26, pages 453-541, 2006

The Deterministic Part of IPC-4: An Overview

Authors: S. Edelkamp, J. Hoffmann

Abstract: We provide an overview of the organization and results of the deterministic part of the 4th International Planning Competition, i.e., of the part concerned with evaluating systems doing deterministic planning. IPC-4 attracted even more competing systems than its already large predecessors, and the competition event was revised in several important respects. After giving an introduction to the IPC,… ▽ More We provide an overview of the organization and results of the deterministic part of the 4th International Planning Competition, i.e., of the part concerned with evaluating systems doing deterministic planning. IPC-4 attracted even more competing systems than its already large predecessors, and the competition event was revised in several important respects. After giving an introduction to the IPC, we briefly explain the main differences between the deterministic part of IPC-4 and its predecessors. We then introduce formally the language used, called PDDL2.2 that extends PDDL2.1 by derived predicates and timed initial literals. We list the competing systems and overview the results of the competition. The entire set of data is far too large to be presented in full. We provide a detailed summary; the complete data is available in an online appendix. We explain how we awarded the competition prizes. △ Less

Submitted 26 September, 2011; originally announced September 2011.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 24, pages 519-579, 2005

Taming Numbers and Durations in the Model Checking Integrated Planning System

Authors: S. Edelkamp

Abstract: The Model Checking Integrated Planning System (MIPS) is a temporal least commitment heuristic search planner based on a flexible object-oriented workbench architecture. Its design clearly separates explicit and symbolic directed exploration algorithms from the set of on-line and off-line computed estimates and associated data structures. MIPS has shown distinguished performance in the last two i… ▽ More The Model Checking Integrated Planning System (MIPS) is a temporal least commitment heuristic search planner based on a flexible object-oriented workbench architecture. Its design clearly separates explicit and symbolic directed exploration algorithms from the set of on-line and off-line computed estimates and associated data structures. MIPS has shown distinguished performance in the last two international planning competitions. In the last event the description language was extended from pure propositional planning to include numerical state variables, action durations, and plan quality objective functions. Plans were no longer sequences of actions but time-stamped schedules. As a participant of the fully automated track of the competition, MIPS has proven to be a general system; in each track and every benchmark domain it efficiently computed plans of remarkable quality. This article introduces and analyzes the most important algorithmic novelties that were necessary to tackle the new layers of expressiveness in the benchmark problems and to achieve a high level of performance. The extensions include critical path analysis of sequentially generated plans to generate corresponding optimal parallel plans. The linear time algorithm to compute the parallel plan bypasses known NP hardness results for partial ordering by scheduling plans with respect to the set of actions and the imposed precedence relations. The efficiency of this algorithm also allows us to improve the exploration guidance: for each encountered planning state the corresponding approximate sequential plan is scheduled. One major strength of MIPS is its static analysis phase that grounds and simplifies parameterized predicates, functions and operators, that infers knowledge to minimize the state description length, and that detects domain object symmetries. The latter aspect is analyzed in detail. MIPS has been developed to serve as a complete and optimal state space planner, with admissible estimates, exploration engines and branching cuts. In the competition version, however, certain performance compromises had to be made, including floating point arithmetic, weighted heuristic search exploration according to an inadmissible estimate and parameterized optimization. △ Less

Submitted 30 June, 2011; originally announced July 2011.

Journal ref: Journal Of Artificial Intelligence Research, Volume 20, pages 195-238, 2003