Purely Declarative Action Descriptions are Overrated: Classical Planning with Simulators
Authors: Guillem Francès, Miquel Ramírez, Nir Lipovetzky, Hector Geffner
IJCAI 2017 | Conference PDF | Archive PDF | Plain Text | LLM Run Details
| Reproducibility Variable | Result | LLM Response |
|---|---|---|
| Research Type | Experimental | To address this question, we develop planning algorithms that have no access to the structure of actions and compare them with state-of-the-art planners over standard planning benchmarks. The performance of the simulation-based planning algorithm BFWS(R) for different R s is shown in Tables 1 and 2. |
| Researcher Affiliation | Academia | Guillem Franc es1, Miquel Ram ırez2, Nir Lipovetzky2 and Hector Geffner1,3 1Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain; 2University of Melbourne, Australia; 3ICREA |
| Pseudocode | No | No structured pseudocode or algorithm blocks were found in the paper. |
| Open Source Code | Yes | All problem encodings and results can be found at https://github.com/aig-upf/2017-planning-with-simulators. |
| Open Datasets | Yes | Benchmarked problems include all instances from the last planning competition (IPC 2014), along with all instances from IPC 2011 domains that did not appear in IPC 2014, with the exception of Parcprinter, Tidybot and Woodworking, which produced parsing errors. There are thus a total of 19 domains, with 20 instances each, for a total of 380 instances. |
| Dataset Splits | No | The paper does not provide specific training/validation/test dataset splits. It evaluates planners on instances from standard planning benchmarks (IPC 2014, IPC 2011) which are effectively test problems for planners, but no explicit data splitting methodology is described for model training/validation. |
| Hardware Specification | Yes | All planners and configurations in both tables have been run on AMD Opteron 6378@2.4Ghz CPUs with CPUtime and memory cutoffs of 1h and 16GB respectively. |
| Software Dependencies | No | The paper mentions software like 'Functional STRIPS planner FS', 'LAPKT toolkit', 'Fast Downward', and 'LAMA-11' but does not provide specific version numbers for these software components. |
| Experiment Setup | Yes | Ties in BFWS(f5) are broken using the #g counter first (nodes with minimum #g preferred), and the accumulated cost to the node, second (cheaper nodes preferred). action costs are assumed to be 1. when the IW(1) run reaches all of the problem goals, but when not, the IW(2) computation is skipped and R G is set directly to the collection of all atoms RA. only novelty-1 and novelty-2 measures are computed, and even the latter are skipped in the BFWS(R) search when the number of atoms is too large. |