This is a review of the book `Intelligent Planning: A Decomposition and Abstraction Based Approach` by Qiang Yang [Yang, 1997], a book focused on classical planning. Why classical planning? In the last years, the classical approach to planning has been challenged by many authors (e.g. [Agree and Chapman, 1987; Agree and Chapman, 1989; Brooks, 1991; Chapman, 1989; Georgeff, 1991; Ginsberg, 1989]). The question is whether its fundamental assumptions and complexity make it of any use in real world applications. The opponents of classical planning (e.g., reactive planning [Brooks, 1986; Kaelbling, 1987]) are important in a number of domains. Nevertheless, in our opinion, there are applications where classical planning is still the only reasonable approach, e.g. logistics, process planning, scheduling. Furthermore, in the last years, many new approaches have been proposed which are elaborations of classical planning, e.g., case-based planning [Hammond, 1990b; Hanks and Weld, 1995; Ihrig and Kambhampati, 1997; Koehler, 1996; Veloto et al., 1996], multi-agent planning [Durfee, 1988, Genesereth and Ketchpel, 1994; Jenning and Wooldridge, 1998], non-STRIPS style planning [Blum and Furst, 1995; Kautz and Selman, 1996], and model checking based planning [Cimatti et al., 1997]. Yang`s book provides a set of basic techniques for generating plans and a set of formal and empirical tools for evaluating and comparing them. The book is divided in three parts. The first part is devoted to the fundamentals of planning. Its title is Representation, Basic, Algorithms, and Analytical Techniques. The second describes the `divide et impera` approach and is titled Problem Decomposition and Solution Combination. The third is a titled Hierarchical Abstraction and it is devoted to the use of abstraction in planning
Intelligent Planning: A Decomposition and Abstraction Based Approach
Giunchiglia, Fausto;
1999-01-01
Abstract
This is a review of the book `Intelligent Planning: A Decomposition and Abstraction Based Approach` by Qiang Yang [Yang, 1997], a book focused on classical planning. Why classical planning? In the last years, the classical approach to planning has been challenged by many authors (e.g. [Agree and Chapman, 1987; Agree and Chapman, 1989; Brooks, 1991; Chapman, 1989; Georgeff, 1991; Ginsberg, 1989]). The question is whether its fundamental assumptions and complexity make it of any use in real world applications. The opponents of classical planning (e.g., reactive planning [Brooks, 1986; Kaelbling, 1987]) are important in a number of domains. Nevertheless, in our opinion, there are applications where classical planning is still the only reasonable approach, e.g. logistics, process planning, scheduling. Furthermore, in the last years, many new approaches have been proposed which are elaborations of classical planning, e.g., case-based planning [Hammond, 1990b; Hanks and Weld, 1995; Ihrig and Kambhampati, 1997; Koehler, 1996; Veloto et al., 1996], multi-agent planning [Durfee, 1988, Genesereth and Ketchpel, 1994; Jenning and Wooldridge, 1998], non-STRIPS style planning [Blum and Furst, 1995; Kautz and Selman, 1996], and model checking based planning [Cimatti et al., 1997]. Yang`s book provides a set of basic techniques for generating plans and a set of formal and empirical tools for evaluating and comparing them. The book is divided in three parts. The first part is devoted to the fundamentals of planning. Its title is Representation, Basic, Algorithms, and Analytical Techniques. The second describes the `divide et impera` approach and is titled Problem Decomposition and Solution Combination. The third is a titled Hierarchical Abstraction and it is devoted to the use of abstraction in planningI documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
