Linear temporal logic as an executable semantics for planning languages

Journal of Logic, Language and Information

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 63-89

  Cialdea Mayer, Marta ^a   Limongelli, Carla ^a   Orlandini, Andrea ^a   Poggioni, Valentina ^a  

^a ROMA TRE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

Applied temporal logic; Artificial intelligence planning; Knowledge representation

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845317913     PISSN: 09258531     EISSN: 15729583     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10849-006-9022-1     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Allen, J. (1991a). Planning as temporal reasoning. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR-91). Cambridge, MA. pp. 3-14.
2. Allen, J. F. (1991b). Temporal reasoning and planning. In J. F. Allen, H. A. Kautz, R. N. Pelavin, & J. D. Tenenberg (Eds.), Reasoning about plans (pp. 1-68). Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
3. Bacchus, F. and Kabanza, F. (1996). Planning for temporally extended goals. In Proceedings of the 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-96), Portland, OR. pp. 1215-1222.
4. Bacchus, F., & Kabanza, F. (2000). 'Using temporal logics to express earch control knowledge for planning'. Artificial Intelligence, 16, 123-191.
5. Bacchus, F., & Ady, M. (1999). Precondition control. Unpublished manuscript, available at http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~fbacchus/on-line.
6. Baral, C. (2003). Knowledge representation, reasoning, and declarative problem solving with answer sets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., Gough, G., & Owens, R. (1989). METATEM: a framework for programming in temporal logic'. In Proceedings of REX Workshop on Stepwise Refinement of Distributed Systems: models, formalisms, correctness, Mook, The Netherlands. Springer, Vol. 430 of LNCS. pp. 94-129.
8. Barringer, H., Fisher, M., Gabbay, D., & Hunter, A. (1991). Meta-reasoning in executable temporal logic. In Proceedings of the Second Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR-91). pp.' 40-49.
9. Bibel, W. (1997). Let's plan it deductively. In Proceedings of the 15th international Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-97), Nagoya, Japan. Vol. 2. pp. 1549-1562.
10. Bylander, T. (1991). Complexity results for planning. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-91), Sydney, Australia. pp. 274-279.
11. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., & Vardi, M. Y. (2002). Reasoning about actions and planning in LTL action theories. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2002), Toulouse, France, pp. 593-602.
12. Cerrito, S., & Cialdea Mayer, M. (1998). Using linear temporal logic to model and solve planning problems. In F. Giunghiglia (Ed.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, Applications (AIMSA'98), Sozopol, Bulgaria. Springer, LNCS 1480. pp. 141-152.
13. Cesta, A., & Oddi, A. (1996). DDL.1: a formal description of a constraint representaton language for physical domains. In M. Ghallab, & A. Milani (Eds.), New direction in AI planning, pp. 341-352. IOS Press, Amsterdam.
14. Cialdea Mayer, M., Orlandini, A., Balestreri, G., & Limongelli, C. (2000). A planner fully based on linear time logic. In S. Chien, S. Kambhampati, & C. Knoblock (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling (AIPS-2000), Breckenridge, co. pp. 347-354.
15. Doherty, P., & Kvarnström, J. (2001). TALplanner: a temporal logic based planner. AI Magazine, 22, 95-102.
16. Erol, K., Hendler, J., & Nau, D. S. (1994). HTN planning: complexity and expressivity. In Proceedings of the 12th National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-94), Seattle, Washington, USA. pp. 1123-1128
17. Fikes, R. E., & Nilsson, N. (1971). STRIPS: a new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence, 2(3-4), 189-208.
18. Finzi, A., Pirri, F., & Reiter, R. (2000). Open world planning in the situation calculus. In Proceedings of the 17th Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-00) and of the 12th Conf. on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (IAAI-00), Austin, Texas, USA. pp. 754-760.
19. Fisher, M., & Owens, R. (1995). An introduction to executable modal and temporal logics. In M. Fisher, & R. Owens (Eds.), Executable modal and temporal logics (Proc. of the IJCAI'93 Workshop), Chambery, France. Springer, (Vol. 897 of LNAI). pp. 1-20.
20. Fox, M., & Long, D. (2003). PDDL2.1: an extension to PDDL for expressing temporal planning domains. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 20, 61-124.
21. Geffner, H. (2002). Perspectives on artificial intelligence planning. In Proceedings of the 18th National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2002), Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, pp. 1013-1023.
22. Huang, Y.-C, Selman, B., & Kautz, H. A. (1999). Control knowledge in planning: benefits and tradeoffs. In Proceedings of the 16th National conf on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-99), Orlando, Florida, pp. 511-517.
23. Janssen, G. L. J. M. (1999). Logics for digital circuit verification, theory, Algorithms and applications. OP-DATA Library Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.
24. Kautz, H., McAllester, D., & Selman, B. (1996). Encoding plans in propositional logic. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'96), Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. pp. 374-384.
25. Kautz, H., & Selman, B. (1992). Planning as satisfiability. In B. Neumann (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th European conf. on artificial intelligence. (ECAI-92), Vienna, Austria, pp. 360-363.
26. Kautz, H., & Selman, B. (1998). BLACKBOX: a new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. In: Working notes of the AIPS-98 Workshop on Planning as Combinatorial Search. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. pp. 58-60.
27. Kautz, H., & Selman, B. (1998b). The role of domain-specific knowledge in the planning as satisfiability framework. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning systems (AIPS-98), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. pp. 181-189.
28. Kautz, H., & Selman, B. (1999). Unifying SAT-based and graph-based planning. In Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-99), Stockholm, Sweden. pp. 318-325.
29. Koehler, J., & Treinen, R. (1995). Constraint deduction in an interval-based temporal logic. In M. Fisher, & R. Owens (Eds.), Executable modal and temporal logics, (Proc. of the IJCAI'93 Workshop, Chambery, France), Springer, Vol. 897 of LNAI. pp. 103-117.
30. Levesque, H. (1996). What is planning in the presence of sensing'?. In Proceedings of the 13th National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-96, Portland, Oregon, USA. pp. 1139-1146.
31. Lifschitz, V. (1999). Answer set planning. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP-99), Cruces, New Mexico, USA. pp. 23-37.
32. Masseron, M., Tollu, C., & Vauzeilles, J. (1993). Generating plans in linear logic: I. actions as proofs. Theoretical Computer Science, 113, 349-370.
33. McCarthy, J., & Hayes, P. J. (1969). Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of502 artificial intelligence. In B. Meltzer, & D. Michie (Eds.), Machine intelligence, Vol 4. (pp. 463-502). Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh.
34. Pednault, E. (1989). ADL: exploiting the middle ground between STRIPS and the situation calculus. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and reasoning (KR-89), Toronto, Canada, pp. 324-332.
35. Pistore, M., & Traverse, P. (2001). Planning as model checking for extended goals in non-deterministic domains. In Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2001), Seattle, Washington, USA. pp. 479-486.
36. Reiter, R. (1991). The frame problem in the situation calculus: a simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. In V. Lifschitz (Ed.), Artificial intelligence and mathematical theory of computation; papers in honor of John McCarthy pp. 359-380. Newyork: (Academic Press).
37. Reiter, R. (2001). Knowledge in action; logical foundations for specifying and implementing dynamical systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Rintanen, J. (1999). Constructing conditional plans by a theorem-prover. Journal of Artificial Intellingence Research, 10, 323-352.
39. Rosenschein, S. J. (1981). Plan synthesis: a logical perspective. In: Proceedings of the 7th Int. Joint Conf on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-81), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 331-337.
40. Son, T., Baral, C., Tran, N., & Mcllraith, S. (2005). Domain-dependent knowledge in answer set programming. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic. To appear.
41. Stephan, B., & Biundo, S. (1996). Deduction based refinement planning. In B. Drabble (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems (AIPS-96), Edinburgh, UK. pp. 213-220.
42. Subrahmanian, V. S., & Zaniolo, C. (1995). Relating stable models and AI planning domains. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP-1995), Tokyo, Japan, pp. 233-247.
43. Wolper, P. (1985). The tableau method for temporal logic: an overview. Logique et Analyse, 28, 119-152.
44. Yang, Q. (1990). Formalizing planning knowledge for hierarchical planning. Computational Intelligence, 6, 12-24.