Regression with respect to sensing actions and partial states

Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 556-561

  Tuan, Le Chi ^a   Baral, Chitta ^a   Zhang, Xin ^a   Son, Tran Cao ^b  

^a Arizona State University   (United States)

^b New Mexico State University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEURISTIC METHODS; QUERY LANGUAGES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEMANTICS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STATE SPACE METHODS;

PARTIAL STATES; PLANNING LANGUAGES; SENSING ACTIONS; STATE-BASED REGRESSION FUNCTION;

ALGORITHMIC LANGUAGES;

EID: 9444290409     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Baral, C.; Kreinovich, V.; and Trejo, R. 2000. Computational complexity of planning and approximate planning in the presence of incompleteness. AI-00 122:241-267.
2. B. Bonet and H. Geffner. Planning with Incomplete Information as Heuristic Search in Belief Space AIPS-00, 52-61, 2000.
3. Bonet, B., and Geffner, H. 2001. Planning As Heuristic Search. Artificial Intelligence 129:5-33.
4. Cimatti, A.; Roveri, M.; and Traverso, P. 1998. Automatic OBDD-based Generation of Universal Plans in Non-Deterministic. AAAI-98, 875-891.
5. T. Eiter; W. Faber; N. Leone; G. Pfeifer; and A. Polleres. 2000. Planning under incomplete information. CL-2000, 807-821.
6. Etzioni, O.; Hanks, S.; Weld, D.; Draper, D.; Lesh, N.; and Williamson, M. 1992. An approach to planning with incomplete information. KR-92, 115-125.
7. Fikes, R., and Nilson, N. 1971. STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. AI-7I.
8. Goldman, R., and Boddy, M. 1994. Conditional linear planning. Planning AIPS-94.
9. Levesque, H. 1996. What is planning in the presence of sensing.AAAI-96.
10. Lobo, J. 1998. COPLAS: a Conditional PLAnner with Sensing actions. Technical Report FS-98-02, AAAI.
11. Nguyen, X.L; Kambhampati, S., and Nigenda, R. 2002. Planning graph as the basis for deriving heuristics for plan synthesis by state space and CSP search. AIJ, 135(1-2):73-123.
12. Pednault, E. 1986. Toward a Mathematical Theory of Plan Synthesis. Ph.D. Dissertation.
13. Pednault, E. 1994. ADL and the state-transition model of actions. Journal of Logic and Computation 4(5):467-513.
14. Peot, M., and Smith, D. 1992. Conditional Nonlinear Planning. AIPS-92, 189-197.
15. Pryor, L., and Collins, G. 1996. Planning for contingencies: A decision-based approach. JAIR-96, 4:287-339.
16. Reiter, R. KNOWLEDGE IN ACTION: Logical Foundations for Describing and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT Press.
17. Rintanen, J. 2000. Constructing conditional plans by a theorem proven Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 10:323-352.
18. Rintanen, J. 2002. Backward Plan Construction for Planning with Partial Observability. Planning AIPS'02.
19. Scherl, R., and Levesque, H. 1993. The frame problem and knowledge producing actions. Artificial AAAI-93, 689-695.
20. Scherl, R., and Levesque, H. 2003. Knowledge, Action, and the Frame Problem. Artificial Intelligence 144(1-2).
21. Son, T., and Baral, C. 2001. Formalizing sensing actions - a transition function based approach. AIJ, 125(1-2):19-91.
22. Son, T.; Tu, P.; and Baral, C. 2004. Planning with Sensing Actions and Incomplete Information using Logic Programming. Logic LPNMR'04, 261-274.
23. Weld, D.; Anderson, C.; and Smith, D. 1998. Extending graphplan to handle uncertainity and sensing actions. AAAI 98.