Planning as mixed-initiative goal manipulation

ICAPS 2005 - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 282-291

  Cox, Michael T ^a   Zhang, Chen ^b  

^a BBN TECHNOLOGIES   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATED PLANNING; DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENTS; MANIPULATION TASK; MIXED-INITIATIVE; MIXED-INITIATIVE PLANNING; PLANNING DOMAINS; USER PERFORMANCE; VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS;

AUTOMATION;

EID: 84890302894     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (30)

1. Aha, D. ed. 2002. Proceedings of a Workshop on Mixed-ini- Tiative Case-based Reasoning. 6th European Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, ECCBR 2002. Aberdeen, Scotland.
2. Becker, M. A. and Smith, S. F. 2000. Mixed-initiative resource management: The AMC barrel allocator. In S. Chien, S. Kambhampati and C. A. Knoblock eds., Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning System (pp. 32-41). Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.
3. Burstein, M. ed. 1994. ARPA/Rome Laboratory Knowledge- based Planning and Scheduling Initiative Workshop Proceedings. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
4. Carbonell, J. G. Blythe, J., Etzioni, O., Gil, Y Joseph, R Kahn, D., Knoblock, C., Minton, S., Perez, A., Reilly, S Veloso, M. M. and Wang, X. 1992. Prodigy4.0: The Manual and Tutorial. Technical Report CMU-CS-92-150. Computer Science Department., Carnegie Mellon University.
5. Cox, M.T. 2000. A conflict of metaphors: Modeling the planning process. In Proceedings of the 2000 Summer Computer Simulation Conference (pp. 666-671). San Diego: The Society for Computer Simulation International.
6. Cox, M. T., Edwin, G, Balasubramanian, K and Elahi, M. 2001. Multiagent goal transformation and mixed-initiative planning using Prodigy/Agent. In Proceedings of the 4th International Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Vol. 7 (pp. 1-6).
7. Cox, M. T. and Veloso, M. M. 1997. Supporting combined human and machine planning: An interface for planning by analogical reasoning. In D. Leake and E. Plaza eds. Proceedings of thelnd International Conf. on Case-Based Reasoning (pp.531-540). Berlin: Springer.
8. Das, J. P., Kar, B. C. and Parilla, R. K. 1996. Cognitive planning: The psychological basis of intelligent behavior. London: Sage Publications.
9. Das, J. P. and Naglieri, J. A. 2001. The Das-Naglieri cognitive assessment system in theory and practice. In J. J. W. Andrews, D. H. Saklofske, and H. L. Janzen eds. Handbook of Psychological Assessment: Ability, achievement, and behavior in children (pp. 34-63). San Diego: Academic Press.
10. Edwin, G 2001. COMAS: Coordination in multiagent systems. Masters dissertation, Wright State University, Computer Science and Engineering Department, Dayton, OH. (Available at URL www.cs.wright.edu/-mcox/COMAS/COMAS. pdf.
11. Edwin, G, and Cox, M. T. 2001. Resource coordination in single agent and multiagent systems. In Proc. of the 13th IEEE International Conf. on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (pp. 18-24). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society.
12. Elahi, M. M. 2003. A distributed planning approach using multiagent goal transformations. Masters dissertation, Wright State University, Computer Science and Engineering Department, Dayton, OH.
13. Ferguson, G and Allen, J. 1998. TRIPS: An Intelligent Integrated Problem-Solving Assistant, In Proceedings of the Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 567-573). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
14. Forbus, K., Usher, J. and Chapman, V. 2003. Sketching for military courses of action diagrams. In Proceedings of the Intelligent User Interfaces Conference (IUI-03). New York: ACM Press.
15. Newell, A. and Simon, H. A. 1963. GPS, a program that simulates human thought. In E. A. Feigenbaum and J. Feld- man eds. Computers and thought (pp. 279-293). New York: McGraw Hill.
16. Myers, K. L., Jarvis, P. A., Tyson, W. M. and Wolverton, M. J. 2003. A mixed-initiative framework for robust plan sketching. In Enrico Giunchiglia, Nicola Muscettola, and Dana Nau eds. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (pp. 256-265). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
17. Newell, A. and Simon, H. A. 1972. Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
18. Pollack, M. E. and Horty, J. F. 1999, winter. There's more to life that making plans. AIMagazine (pp. 71-83). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/The MIT Press.
19. Ram, A. and Leake, D. 1995. Learning, goals, and learning goal. In A. Ram and D. Leake eds. Goal-Driven Learning. (pp. 1-37). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
20. Ratterman, M. J., Spector, L., Grafman. J., Levin, H. and Harward. H. 2001. Partial and total-order planning: Evi- dence from normal and prefrontally damaged populations. Cognitive Science, 25, 941-975.
21. Schank, R. C. 1982. Dynamic memory: A theory of reminding and learning in computers and people. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
22. Schank, R. C. and Abelson, R. P. 1977. Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Sycara, K. and Lewis, M. in press. Integrating intelligent agents into human teams. To appear in E. Salas ed. Team Cognition.
24. Tecuci, G ed. 2003. Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Mixed-Initiative Intelligent Systems. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
25. Thompson, C. A., Goker, M. H. and Langley, P. 2004. A personalized system for conversational recommendations, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 21: 393-428.
26. Veloso, M. M. 1994. Planning and learning by analogical reasoning. Berlin: Springer.
27. Veloso, M. M., Carbonell, J. G, Perez, A., Borrajo, D., Fink, E. and Blythe, J. 1995 Integrating planning and learning: The PRODIGY architecture. Journal of Theoretical and Experimental Artificial Intelligence. 7(1): 81-120.
28. Williamson, M. 1996. A value-directed approach to planning. Doctoral dissertation. University of Washington, Computer Science Department, Seattle.
29. Zhang, C. 2002. Cognitive models for mixed-initiative planning. Masters dissertation, Wright State University, Computer Science and Engineering Department, Dayton, OH. (Available at URL www.cs.wright.edu/~mcox/GTrans/ zhang2002.pdf.
30. Zhang, C., Cox, M. T. and Immaneni, T. 2002. GTrans version 2.1 User manual and reference (Tech. Rep. No. WSU- CS-02-02). Dayton, OH: Wright State University, Department of Computer Science and Engineering.