Planning in dynamic environments: Extending HTNs with nonlinear continuous effects

Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 2, Issue , 2010, Pages 1115-1120

  Molineaux, Matt ^a   Klenk, Matthew ^b   Aha, David W ^b  

^a KNEXUS RESEARCH CORPORATION   (United States)

^b NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADDITIONAL COSTS; BENCHMARK DOMAINS; BENEFITS OF PLANNING; DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE; DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENTS; HIERARCHICAL TASK NETWORKS; PROJECTION ALGORITHMS; TRAINING SIMULATION;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 77958545839     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. Auslander, B., Molineaux, M., Aha, D.W., Munro, A., & Pizzini, Q. (2009). Towards research on goal reasoning with the TAO Sandbox (Technical Report AIC-09-155). Washington, DC: Naval Research Laboratory, Navy Center for Applied Research on AI.
2. Baral, C, Son, T., and Tuan, L. (2002). A transition function based characterization of actions with delayed and continuous effects. In Proceedings of KR-02. p. 291-302
3. Castillo, L.; Fdez-Olivares, J.; Garcia-Perez, O.; and Palao, F. (2006). Efficiently handling temporal knowledge in an HTN planner. In Sixteenth International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling.
4. Coles, A., Coles, A., Fox, M., and Long, D. (2009). Temporal planning in domains with linear processes. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). Pasadena, CA.
5. Cushing, W., Kambhampati, S., Mausam, and Weld, D. (2007). When is temporal planning really temporal planning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). p. 1852-1859. Hyderabad, India.
6. desJardins, M., Durfee, E., Ortiz, C, & Wolverton, M. (1999). A survey of research in distributed, continual planning. AI Magazine, 20(4), 13-22. (Pubitemid 30530572)
7. Fox, M. & Long, D. (2006). Modelling mixed discrete-continuous domains for planning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 27:235-297. (Pubitemid 44681378)
8. R. Howey and D. Long. (2003). Validating plans with continuous effects. In Proc. of the 22nd Workshop of the UK Planning and Scheduling Special Interest Group.
9. Howey, R., Long, D., and Fox., M. (2004). VAL: Automatic Plan Validation, Continuous Effects and Mixed Initiative Planning using PDDL. The 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 294-301.
10. th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS).
11. rd International Planning Competition: Results and analysis. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 20: 1-59.
12. th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS).
13. Molineaux, M., Klenk, M. & Aha, D. (2010). Goal-driven autonomy in a navy strategy simulation. In Twenty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-10). Atlanta, Georgia.
14. Nau, D., Au, T.-C, Ilghami, O., Kuter, U., Murdock, J. W., Wu, D., & Yaman, F. (2003). SHOP2: An HTN planning system. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 20:379-404.
15. Penberthy, J. & Weld, D. (1994). Temporal Planning with Continuous Change. Proceedings of AAAI-94. Seattle, WA.
16. Press, W., Teukolsky, S., Vetterling, W., and Flannery, B. (2007). Numerical Recipes 3rd Edition: the Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge University Press.
17. th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1223-1228. Pittsburgh, PA.