Chapter 3 Complexity of Classical Planning

Similar documents
Chapter 6 Planning-Graph Techniques

Intelligent Agents. State-Space Planning. Ute Schmid. Cognitive Systems, Applied Computer Science, Bamberg University. last change: 14.

Chapter 1 Introduc0on

CSC2542 Planning-Graph Techniques

Principles of AI Planning. Principles of AI Planning. 7.1 How to obtain a heuristic. 7.2 Relaxed planning tasks. 7.1 How to obtain a heuristic

Theory of Computations Spring 2016 Practice Final

Theory of Computations Spring 2016 Practice Final Exam Solutions

Decision Procedures. An Algorithmic Point of View. Decision Procedures for Propositional Logic. D. Kroening O. Strichman.

Solution for Homework set 3

Heuristic Search for Planning

Analysis of Boolean Programs TACAS 2013

Classical Planning Problems: Representation Languages

Hierarchical Task Networks

CS 512, Spring 2017: Take-Home End-of-Term Examination

Model checking pushdown systems

Data Structures and Algorithms

OWL 2 Profiles. An Introduction to Lightweight Ontology Languages. Markus Krötzsch University of Oxford. Reasoning Web 2012

Algorithms and Data Structures

Discrete Optimization. Lecture Notes 2

Outline Purpose How to analyze algorithms Examples. Algorithm Analysis. Seth Long. January 15, 2010

DATABASE THEORY. Lecture 11: Introduction to Datalog. TU Dresden, 12th June Markus Krötzsch Knowledge-Based Systems

CS256 Applied Theory of Computation

Acknowledgements. Outline

Copyright 2000, Kevin Wayne 1

! Greed. O(n log n) interval scheduling. ! Divide-and-conquer. O(n log n) FFT. ! Dynamic programming. O(n 2 ) edit distance.

CSC2542 SAT-Based Planning. Sheila McIlraith Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Summer 2014

The Complexity of Change

8.1 Polynomial-Time Reductions

LTCS Report. Concept Descriptions with Set Constraints and Cardinality Constraints. Franz Baader. LTCS-Report 17-02

The Turing Machine. Unsolvable Problems. Undecidability. The Church-Turing Thesis (1936) Decision Problem. Decision Problems

Partial-Order Boolean Games: Informational Independence in a Logic-based Model of Strategic Interaction

Chapter 8. NP and Computational Intractability. Slides by Kevin Wayne. Copyright 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley. All rights reserved.

Planungsbasierte Kommunikationsmodelle

Inductive Synthesis. Neil Immerman. joint work with Shachar Itzhaky, Sumit Gulwani, and Mooly Sagiv

Greedy Algorithms 1. For large values of d, brute force search is not feasible because there are 2 d

CS 125 Section #10 Midterm 2 Review 11/5/14

! Greed. O(n log n) interval scheduling. ! Divide-and-conquer. O(n log n) FFT. ! Dynamic programming. O(n 2 ) edit distance.

Seach algorithms The travelling salesman problem The Towers of Hanoi Playing games. Comp24412: Symbolic AI. Lecture 4: Search. Ian Pratt-Hartmann

Nonstandard Inferences in Description Logics

Umans Complexity Theory Lectures

The Complexity of Relational Queries: A Personal Perspective

1. [5 points each] True or False. If the question is currently open, write O or Open.

Computer Science Technical Report

6.170 Lecture 6 Procedure specifications MIT EECS

Efficiently Reasoning about Programs

CS 580: Algorithm Design and Analysis

Computability Summary

3/7/2018. CS 580: Algorithm Design and Analysis. 8.1 Polynomial-Time Reductions. Chapter 8. NP and Computational Intractability

Array Dependence Analysis as Integer Constraints. Array Dependence Analysis Example. Array Dependence Analysis as Integer Constraints, cont

Introduction to Parameterized Complexity

Model checking for nonmonotonic logics: algorithms and complexity

Hierarchical Task Networks. Planning to perform tasks rather than to achieve goals

Exercises Computational Complexity

Containment of Data Graph Queries

Limitations of Algorithmic Solvability In this Chapter we investigate the power of algorithms to solve problems Some can be solved algorithmically and

T Parallel and Distributed Systems (4 ECTS)

Introduction to Algorithms. Lecture 24. Prof. Patrick Jaillet

Finite automata. We have looked at using Lex to build a scanner on the basis of regular expressions.

Derivatives and Graphs of Functions

CSE 417 Network Flows (pt 3) Modeling with Min Cuts

Implementation of Lexical Analysis. Lecture 4

NP-Completeness. Algorithms

HTN Planning: Complexity and Expressivity*

PCPs and Succinct Arguments

Assignment 4 CSE 517: Natural Language Processing

Reductions. designing algorithms establishing lower bounds establishing intractability classifying problems. Bird s-eye view

Automata Theory for Reasoning about Actions

PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC (2)

Problems, Languages, Machines, Computability, Complexity

Automated Planning. Plan-Space Planning / Partial Order Causal Link Planning

Where Can We Draw The Line?

Knowledge Representation. CS 486/686: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence

Games, Puzzles & Computation

Theory of Integers. CS389L: Automated Logical Reasoning. Lecture 13: The Omega Test. Overview of Techniques. Geometric Description

Randomized algorithms have several advantages over deterministic ones. We discuss them here:

Graduate Examination. Department of Computer Science The University of Arizona Spring March 5, Instructions

ALGORITHMIC DECIDABILITY OF COMPUTER PROGRAM-FUNCTIONS LANGUAGE PROPERTIES. Nikolay Kosovskiy

W[1]-hardness. Dániel Marx 1. Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA SZTAKI) Budapest, Hungary

CDM Loop Programs. 05-loop-progs 2017/12/15 23:18. Program Equivalence 3. Program Transformations 4. Rudimentary Functions 5. Rudimentary Programs 6

Boolean Functions (Formulas) and Propositional Logic

NP and computational intractability. Kleinberg and Tardos, chapter 8

Answers. The University of Nottingham SCHOOL OF COMPUTER SCIENCE A LEVEL 3 MODULE, AUTUMN SEMESTER KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING

Approximation Algorithms

Counting multiplicity over infinite alphabets

Lecture 4: January 12, 2015

Theory Bridge Exam Example Questions Version of June 6, 2008

CS420/520 Algorithm Analysis Spring 2010 Lecture 01

Situation Calculus and YAGI

The Satisfiability Problem [HMU06,Chp.10b] Satisfiability (SAT) Problem Cook s Theorem: An NP-Complete Problem Restricted SAT: CSAT, k-sat, 3SAT

Polarized Rewriting and Tableaux in B Set Theory

The Resolution Algorithm

CPSC 320 Notes: What's in a Reduction?

COMP4418 Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Variants of Turing Machines

W[1]-hardness. Dániel Marx. Recent Advances in Parameterized Complexity Tel Aviv, Israel, December 3, 2017

CSE 105 THEORY OF COMPUTATION

Alex Schaefer. April 9, 2017

We ve studied the main models and concepts of the theory of computation:

6.034 Notes: Section 3.1

EECS 203 Spring 2016 Lecture 8 Page 1 of 6

Transcription:

Lecture slides for Automated Planning: Theory and Practice Chapter 3 Complexity of Classical Planning Dana S. Nau CMSC 722, AI Planning University of Maryland, Spring 2008 Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 1

Review: Classical Representation Function-free first-order language L Statement of a classical planning problem: P = (s 0, g, O) s 0 : initial state - a set of ground atoms of L g: goal formula - a set of literals Operator: (name, preconditions, effects) Classical planning problem: P = (Σ, s 0, S g ) Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 2

Review: Set-Theoretic Representation Like classical representation, but restricted to propositional logic State: a set of propositions - these correspond to ground atoms {on-c1-pallet, on-c1-r1, on-c1-c2,, at-r1-l1, at-r1-l2, } No operators, just actions take-crane1-loc1-c3-c1-p1 precond: belong-crane1-loc1, attached-p1-loc1, empty-crane1, top-c3-p1, on-c3-c1 delete: add: empty-crane1, in-c3-p1, top-c3-p1, on-c3-p1 holding-crane1-c3, top-c1-p1 Weaker representational power than classical representation Problem statement can be exponentially larger Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 3

Review: State-Variable Representation A state variable is like a record structure in a computer program Instead of on(c1,c2) we might write cpos(c1)=c2 Load and unload operators: Equivalent power to classical representation Each representation requires a similar amount of space Each can be translated into the other in low-order polynomial time Classical representation is more popular, mainly for historical reasons In many cases, state-variable representation is more convenient Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 4

Motivation Recall that in classical planning, even simple problems can have huge search spaces s 0 Example:» DWR with five locations, three piles, three robots, 100 containers» 10 277 location 1 location 2 states» About 10 190 times as many states as there are particles in universe How difficult is it to solve classical planning problems? The answer depends on which representation scheme we use Classical, set-theoretic, state-variable Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 5

Outline Background on complexity analysis Restrictions (and a few generalizations) of classical planning Decidability and undecidability Tables of complexity results Classical representation Set-theoretic representation State-variable representation Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 6

Complexity Analysis Complexity analyses are done on decision problems or language-recognition problems A language is a set L of strings over some alphabet A Recognition procedure for L» A procedure R(x) that returns yes iff the string x is in L» If x is not in L, then R(x) may return no or may fail to terminate Translate classical planning into a language-recognition problem Examine the language-recognition problem s complexity Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 7

Planning as a Language-Recognition Problem Consider the following two languages: PLAN-EXISTENCE = {P : P is the statement of a planning problem that has a solution} PLAN-LENGTH = {(P,n) : P is the statement of a planning problem that has a solution of length n} Look at complexity of recognizing PLAN-EXISTENCE and PLAN-LENGTH under different conditions Classical, set-theoretic, and state-variable representations Various restrictions and extensions on the kinds of operators we allow Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 8

Complexity of Language-Recognition Problems Suppose R is a recognition procedure for a language L Complexity of R T R (n) = worst-case runtime for R on strings in L of length n S R (n) = worst-case space requirement for R on strings in L of length n Complexity of recognizing L T L = best asymptotic time complexity of any recognition procedure for L S L = best asymptotic space complexity of any recognition procedure for L Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 9

Complexity classes: NLOGSPACE P NP PSPACE EXPTIME NEXPTIME EXPSPACE Complexity Classes (nondeterministic procedure, logarithmic space) (deterministic procedure, polynomial time) (nondeterministic procedure, polynomial time) (deterministic procedure, polynomial space) (deterministic procedure, exponential time) (nondeterministic procedure, exponential time) (deterministic procedure, exponential space) Let C be a complexity class and L be a language Recognizing L is C-hard if for every language L' in C, L' can be reduced to L in a polynomial amount of time» NP-hard, PSPACE-hard, etc. Recognizing L is C-complete if L is C-hard and L is also in C» NP-complete, PSPACE-complete, etc. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 10

Possible Conditions Do we give the operators as input to the planning algorithm, or fix them in advance? Do we allow infinite initial states? Do we allow function symbols? Do we allow negative effects? Do we allow negative preconditions? Do we allow more than one precondition? Do we allow operators to have conditional effects?* These take us outside classical planning i.e., effects that only occur when additional preconditions are true Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 11

Decidability of Planning Halting problem Can cut off the search at every path of length n Next: analyze complexity for the decidable cases Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 12

Complexity of Planning γ PSPACE-complete or NP-complete for some sets of operators α no operator has >1 precondition Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 13

Caveat: these are worst-case results Individual planning domains can be much easier Example: both DWR and Blocks World fit here, but neither is that hard For them, PLAN-EXISTENCE is in P and PLAN-LENGTH is NP-complete Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 14

Often PLAN-LENGTH is harder than PLAN-EXISTENCE But it s easier here: We can cut off every search path at depth n Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 15

Equivalences Set-theoretic representation and ground classical representation are basically identical For both, exponential blowup in the size of the input Thus complexity looks smaller as a function of the input size Classical and state-variable representations are equivalent, except that some of the restrictions aren t possible in state-variable representations Hence, fewer lines in the table Set-theoretic or ground classical representation trivial write all of the ground instances Classical representation P(x 1,,x n ) becomes f P (x 1,,x n )=1 f(x 1,,x n )=y becomes P f (x 1,,x n,y) State-variable representation Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ 16

Like classical rep, but fewer lines in the table α no operator has >1 precondition β every operator with >1 precondition Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License: is the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/ composition of other operators 17