Abstract
The International Planning Competition is a biennial event organized in the context of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling. The 2008 competition included, for the first time, a learning track for comparing approaches for improving automated planners via learning. In this paper, we describe the structure of the learning track, the planning domains used for evaluation, the participating systems, the results, and our observations. Towards supporting the goal of domain-independent learning, one of the key features of the competition was to disallow any code changes or parameter tweaks after the training domains were revealed to the participants. The competition results show that at this stage no learning for planning system outperforms state-of-the-art planners in a domain independent manner across a wide range of domains. However, they appear to be close to providing such performance. Evaluating learning for planning systems in a blind competition raises important questions concerning criteria that should be taken into account in future competitions.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Aler, R., Borrajo, D., & Isasi, P. (2002). Using genetic programming to learn and improve control knowledge. Artificial Intelligence, 141(1–2), 29–56.
Bjarnason, R., Tadepalli, P., & Fern, A. (2007). Searching solitaire in real time. ICGA Journal, 30(3), 131–142.
Blockeel, H., & De Raedt, L. (1997). Top-down induction of first order logical decision trees. Artificial Intelligence, 101, 285–297.
Bonet, B., & Geffner, H. (2003). Labeled RTDP: improving the convergence of real-time dynamic programming. In Proceedings of the international conference on automated planning and scheduling (pp. 12–31).
Boutilier, C., Reiter, R., & Price, B. (2001). Symbolic dynamic programming for first-order MDPs. In Proceedings of the international joint conference of artificial intelligence (pp. 690–700).
Chen, Y., Wah, B. W., & Hsu, C. (2006). Temporal planning using subgoal partitioning and resolution in SGPlan. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 26, 323–369.
Dzeroski, S., De Raedt, L., & Driessens, K. (2001). Relational reinforcement learning. Machine Learning Journal, 43, 7–52.
Estlin, T. A., & Mooney, R. J. (1996). Multi-strategy learning of search control for partial-order planning. In Proceedings of the thirteenth national conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 843–848).
Fern, A., Yoon, S., & Givan, R. (2006). Approximate policy iteration with a policy language bias: solving relational Markov decision processes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 25, 85–118.
Fikes, R., & Nilsson, N. (1971). STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 2(3/4), 189–208.
Fikes, R. E., Hart, P. E., & Nilsson, N. J. (1972). Learning and executing generalized robot plans. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 3(1–3), 251–288.
Galvani, B., Gerevini, A., Saetti, A., & Vallati, M. (2009). A planner based on an automatically configurable portfolio of domain-independent planners with macro-actions: PbP. In International conference on automated planning and scheduling.
Hoffmann, J., & Nebel, B. (2001). The FF planning system: Fast plan generation through heuristic search. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 14, 263–302.
Huang, Y.-C., Selman, B., & Kautz, H. (2000). Learning declarative control rules for constraint-based planning. In Proceedings of seventeenth international conference on machine learning (pp. 415–422).
Iba, G. (1989). A heuristic approach to the discovery of macro-operators. Machine Learning, 3(4), 285–317.
Joshi, S., & Khardon, R. (2008). Stochastic planning with first order decision diagrams. In Proceedings of the international conference on automated planning and scheduling.
Joshi, S., Kersting, K., & Khardon, R. (2010). Self-Taught decision theoretic planning with first-order decision diagrams. In Proceedings of the international conference on automated planning and scheduling (pp. 89–96).
Junghanns, A., & Schaeffer, J. (2001). Sokoban: enhancing general single-agent search methods using domain knowledge. Artificial Intelligence, 129(1–2), 219–251.
Kersting, K., van Otterlo, M., & De Raedt, L. (2004). Bellman goes relational. In Proceedings of the international conference on machine learning.
Khardon, R. (1999). Learning action strategies for planning domains. Artificial Intelligence, 113(1–2), 125–148.
La Rosa, T., García Olaya, A., & Borrajo, D. (2007). Using cases utility for heuristic planning improvement. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on case based reasoning.
Martin, M., & Geffner, H. (2000). Learning generalized policies in planning domains using concept languages. In Proceedings of seventh international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning.
McDermott, D. (1998). PDDL—the planning domain definition language. In The 1st international planning competition.
Minton, S. (1988). Quantitative results concerning the utility of explanation-based learning. In Proceedings of national conference on artificial intelligence.
Minton, S. (Ed.) (1993). Machine learning methods for planning. San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann.
Minton, S., Carbonell, J. G., Knoblock, C. A., Kuokka, D., Etzioni, O., & Gil, Y. (1989). Explanation-based learning: a problem solving perspective. Artificial Intelligence, 40, 63–118.
Nigenda, R., Nguyen, X., & Kambhampati, S. (2000). AltAlt: combining the advantages of graphplan and heuristic state search. In International conference on knowledge-based computer systems. Citeseer.
Puterman, M. L. (1994). Markov decision processes: discrete dynamic stochastic programming. New York: Wiley.
Richter, S., & Westphal, M. (2008). The Lama planner using landmark counting in heuristic search. In Proceedings of the international planning competition.
Sanner, S., & Boutilier, C. (2009). Practical solution techniques for first-order MDPs. Artificial Intelligence, 173, 748–788.
Sutton, R., & Barto, A. (1998). Reinforcement learning: an introduction. Cambridge: MIT.
Tadepalli, P., Givan, B., & Driessens, K. (2004). Relational reinforcement: an overview. In Proceedings of the workshop on relational reinforcement learning, Banff, Canada, International conference on machine learning.
Taylor, M. E., & Stone, P. (2009). Transfer learning for reinforcement learning domains: a survey. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 10, 1633–1685.
Vidal, V., & Geffner, H. (2006). Branching and pruning: an optimal temporal POCL planner based on constraint programming. Artificial Intelligence, 170(3), 298–335.
Wang, C., & Khardon, R. (2007). Policy iteration for relational MDPs. In Proceedings of the workshop on uncertainty in artificial intelligence.
Wang, C., Joshi, S., & Khardon, R. (2008). First-Order decision diagrams for relational MDPs. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 31, 431–472.
Whiteson, S., Tanner, B., & White, A. (2010). AI Magazine, 31(2), 81–94.
Xu, L., Hutter, F., Hoos, H., & Leyton-Brown, K. (2007). SATzilla-07: the design and analysis of an algorithm portfolio for SAT. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 4741, p. 712).
Yoon, S., Fern, A., & Givan, R. (2002). Inductive policy selection for first-order MDPs. In Proceedings of eighteenth conference in uncertainty in artificial intelligence.
Yoon, S., Fern, A., & Givan, R. (2006). Learning heuristic functions from relaxed plans. In International conference on automated planning and scheduling (ICAPS).
Younes, H. (2003). Extending PDDL to model stochastic decision processes. In Proceedings of the ICAPS-03 workshop on PDDL.
Zimmerman, T., & Kambhampati, S. (2003). Learning-assisted automated planning: looking back, taking stock, going forward. AI Magazine, 24(2), 73–96.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Editors: S. Whiteson and M. Littman.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fern, A., Khardon, R. & Tadepalli, P. The first learning track of the international planning competition. Mach Learn 84, 81–107 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-011-5234-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-011-5234-y