Phase transitions in classical planning: An experimental study

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, ICAPS 2004

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 101-110

  Rintanen, Jussi ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; GRAPH THEORY; HEURISTIC METHODS; PROBLEM SOLVING; SAMPLING;

BOOLEAN STATE VARIABLES; HEURISTIC LOCAL SEARCH; RANDOM GRAPHS; TRANSITION GRAPHS;

PHASE TRANSITIONS;

EID: 13444281237     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. Blum, A. L., and Furst, M. L. 1997. Fast planning through planning graph analysis. Artificial Intelligence 90(1-2):281-300.
2. Bollobás, B. 1985. Random graphs. Academic Press.
3. Bonet, B., and Geffner, H. 2001. Planning as heuristic search. Artificial Intelligence 129(1-2):5-33.
4. Bylander, T. 1994. The computational complexity of prepositional STRIPS planning. Artificial Intelligence 69(1-2): 165-204.
5. Bylander, T. 1996. A probabilistic analysis of prepositional STRIPS planning. Artificial Intelligence 81(1-2):241-271.
6. Cheeseman, P.; Kanefsky, B.; and Taylor, W. M. 1991. Where the really hard problems are. In Mylopoulos, J., ed., Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 331-337. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
7. Dubois, O., and Dequen, G. 2001. A backbone-search heuristic for efficient solving of hard 3-SAT formulae. In Nebel, B., ed., Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 248-253. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
8. Fox, M., and Long, D. 2003. The third international planning competition: results and analysis. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 20:1-59.
9. Gent, I., and Walsh, T. 1998. Beyond NP: the QSAT phase transition. Technical Report APES-05-1998, University of Strathclyde, Department of Computer Science.
10. Gerevini, A., and Serina, I. 2002. LPG: a planner based on local search for planning graphs with action costs. In Ghallab, M.; Hertzberg, J.; and Traverso, P., eds., Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems, 13-22. AAAI Press.
11. Gomes, C. P.; Selman, B.; Crato, N.; and Kautz, H. 2000. Heavy-tailed phenomena in satisfiability and constraint satisfaction problems. Journal of Automated Reasoning 24(1-2):67-100.
12. Hoffmann, J., and Nebel, B. 2001. The FF planning system: Fast plan generation through heuristic search. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 14:253-302.
13. Huberman, B. A., and Hogg, T. 1987. Phase transitions in artificial intelligence systems. Artificial Intelligence 33(2):155-171.
14. Kautz, H., and Selman, B. 1996. Pushing the envelope: planning, propositional logic, and stochastic search. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the Eighth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, 1194-1201. Menlo Park, California: AAAI Press.
15. McDermott, D. 2000. The 1998 AI planning systems competition. AI Magazine 21(2):35-55.
16. McMillan, K. L. 2003. Interpolation and SAT-based model checking. In Hunt Jr., W. A., and Somenzi, F., eds., Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Aided Verification (CAV2003), number 2725 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1-13.
17. Mézard, M.; Parisi, G.; and Zecchina, R. 2002. Analytic and algorithmic solution of random satisfiability problems. Science 297:812-815.
18. Mneimneh, M., and Sakallah, K. 2003. Computing vertex eccentricity in exponentially large graphs: QBF formulation and solution. In Giunchiglia, E., and Tacchella, A., eds., SAT 2003 - Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing, number 2919 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 411-425.
19. Rintanen, J.; Heljanko, K.; and Niemelä, I. 2004. Parallel encodings of classical planning as satisfiability. Report 198, Albert-Ludwigs- Universität Freiburg, Institut für Informatik.
20. Rintanen, J. 1998. A planning algorithm not based on directional search. In Cohn, A. G.; Schubert, L. K.; and Shapiro, S. C., eds., Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference (KR '98), 617-624. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
21. Rintanen, J. 2003. Symmetry reduction for SAT representations of transition systems. In Giunchiglia, E.; Muscettola, N.; and Nau, D., eds., Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Planning and Scheduling, 32-40. AAAI Press.
22. Ryan, L. 2003. Efficient algorithms for clause-learning SAT solvers. Masters thesis, Simon Fraser University.
23. Seitz, S., and Orponen, P. 2003. An efficient local search method for random 3-satisfiability. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics 16(0).
24. Selman, B.; Mitchell, D. G.; and Levesque, H. 1996. Generating hard satisfiability problems. Artificial Intelligence 81(1-2):459-465.
25. Slaney, J., and Thiébaux, S. 1998. On the hardness of decision and optimisation problems. In Prade, H., ed., Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 244-248. John Wiley & Sons.