Skip to main content

Understanding and extending Graphplan

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Recent Advances in AI Planning (ECP 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1348))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We provide a reconstruction of Blum and Furst's Graphplan algorithm, and use the reconstruction to extend and improve the original algorithm in several ways. In our reconstruction, the process of growing the planning-graph and inferring mutex relations corresponds to doing forward state-space refinement over disjunctively represented plans. The backward search phase of Graphplan corresponds to solving a binary dynamic constraint satisfaction problem. Our reconstruction sheds light on the sources of strength of Graphplan. We also use the reconstruction to explain how Graphplan can be made goal-directed, how it can be extended to handle actions with conditional effects, and how backward state-space refinement can be generalized to apply to disjunctive plans. Finally, we discuss how the backward search phase of Graphplan can be improved by applying techniques from CSP literature, and by teasing apart planning and scheduling (resource allocation) phases in Graphplan.

This research is supported in part by the NSF NYI award IRI-9457634, the ARPI Initiative grant F30602-95-C-0247 and the ARPA AASERT grant DAAH04-96-1-0231. We would like to thank Avrim Blum and Dan Weld for helpful discussions on Graphplan, and Mark Peot and David Smith for making their Lisp implementation of Graphplan available to us.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barrett, A. and Weld, D. 1994. Partial Order Planing: Evaluating possible efficiency gains. Artificial Intelligence, 67(1):71–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, A. and Furst, M. 1995. Fast planning through planning graph analysis. In Proc. IJCAI-95 (Extended version appears in Artificial Intelligence, 90(1–2))

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayardo, R. and Schrag, R. 1997. Using CSP look-back techniques to improve real-word SAT instances. In Proc. AAAI-97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frost, D and Dechter, R. 1994. In search of best constraint satisfaction search. In Proc. AAAI-94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drummond, M. 1989. Situated control rules. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 103–113. Morgan Kau fmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kambhampati, S., Knoblock, C., and Yang, Q. 1995. Planning as refinement search: A unified framework for evaluating design tradeoffs in partial order planning. Artificial Intelligence, 76(12):167–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kambhampati, S. and Yang, X. 1996, On the role of disjunctive representations and constraint propagation in refinement planning. In Proceedings of the fifth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. 35–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kambhampati, S. 1997a. Challenges in bridging plan synthesis paradigms. In Proc. UCAI-97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kambhampati, S. 1997b. On the relations between intelligent backtracking and explanation-based learning in planning and constraint satisfaction. rakaposhi.eas.asu.edu/pub/rao/jour-ddb.ps.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kambhampati. S. 1997c. Refinement planning as a unifying framework for plan synthesis. AI Magazine. 8(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kautz, H. and Selman, B. 1996. Pushing the envelope: Planning Propositional Logic and Stochastic Search. In Proceedings of National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1194–11201

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, D. 1996. A Heuristic estimator for means-ends analysis in planning. In: Proceedings of 3 rd International Conference on AI Planning Systems. AAAI Press. 142–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittal, S. and Falkenhainer, B. 1990. Dynamic Constraint Satisfaction Problems. In Proc. AAAI-90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, E and Kambhampati, S. 1997. Making Graphplan goal-directed. Forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisig, W. 1982. Petrie Nets: An Introduction. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D and Peot, M. 1996. Suspending recursion in partial order planning. In Proc. 3 rd Intl. Conference on AI Planning Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, B and Kambhampati, S. 1997. Teasing apart planning and scheduling in Graphplan. Forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, E. Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press. 1993.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Sam Steel Rachid Alami

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kambhampati, S., Parker, E., Lambrecht, E. (1997). Understanding and extending Graphplan. In: Steel, S., Alami, R. (eds) Recent Advances in AI Planning. ECP 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1348. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63912-8_91

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63912-8_91

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63912-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69665-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics