Commitment Strategies in Planning: A Comparative Analysis
Abstract
In this paper we compare the utility of different commitment strategies in planning. Under a "least commitment strategy", plans are represented as partial orders and operators are ordered only when interactions are detected. We investigate claims of the inherent advantages of planning with partial orders, as compared to planning with total orders. By focusing our analysis on the issue of operator ordering commitment, we are able to carry out a rigorous comparative analysis of two planners. We show that partial-order planning can be more efficient than total-order planning, but we also show that this is not necessarily so. 1
Cite
Text
Minton et al. "Commitment Strategies in Planning: A Comparative Analysis." International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1991.Markdown
[Minton et al. "Commitment Strategies in Planning: A Comparative Analysis." International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1991.](https://mlanthology.org/ijcai/1991/minton1991ijcai-commitment/)BibTeX
@inproceedings{minton1991ijcai-commitment,
title = {{Commitment Strategies in Planning: A Comparative Analysis}},
author = {Minton, Steven and Bresina, John L. and Drummond, Mark},
booktitle = {International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence},
year = {1991},
pages = {259-267},
url = {https://mlanthology.org/ijcai/1991/minton1991ijcai-commitment/}
}