Author name cluster
Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.
AAAI Conference 2026 System Paper
The demo presents a tool that visualizes the acting of planning agents in dynamic environments that might be modified by "acts of nature'', The purpose of this tool is to better understand the behavior of the agent, debug agent's behavior, and for making the underlying planning concepts accessible to wider audience.
KR Conference 2025 Conference Paper
With the recent interest in the reversibility of action effects, i. e. , whether the effects of the action can be undone by applying other actions, the question arose how hard it is to reverse an action in a non-deterministic domain. With the use of phi-reversibility, the paper investigates the computational complexity of weak and strong non-deterministic action reversibility in fully observable non-deterministic domains, showing PSPACE-completeness for all weak variants in question and EXP-hardness and EXP, or NEXP memberships for strong variants.
ICAPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper
Classical planning looks for a sequence of actions that transform the initial state of the environment into a goal state. Studying whether the effects of an action can be undone by a sequence of other actions, that is, action reversibility, is beneficial, for example, in determining whether an action is safe to apply. This paper deals with action reversibility of non-deterministic actions, i. e. , actions whose application might result in different outcomes. Inspired by the established notions of weak and strong plans in non-deterministic (or FOND) planning, we define the notions of weak and strong reversibility for non-deterministic actions. We then focus on the universality and uniformity of action reversibility, that is, whether we can always undo all possible effects of the action by the same means (i. e. , policy), or whether some of the effects can never be undone. We show how these classes of problems can be solved via classical or FOND planning and evaluate our approaches on FOND benchmark domains.
ICAPS Conference 2022 Conference Paper
Satisficing planning aims at generating plans that are not necessarily optimal. Often, minimising plan generation time negatively affects quality of generated plans. Acquiring plans quickly might be of critical importance in decision-making systems that operate nearly in realtime. However, (very) suboptimal plans might be expensive to execute and more prone to failures. Optimising plans after they are generated, in a spare time, can improve their quality. This paper focuses on speeding up the (Greedy) Action Elimination methods, which are used for identifying and removing redundant actions from plans in polynomial time. We present two enhancements of these methods: Plan Action Landmarks, actions that are not redundant in a given plan, and Action Cycles which are subsequences of actions which if removed do not affect the state trajectory after the last action of the cycle. We evaluate the introduced methods on benchmark problems from the Agile tracks of the International Planning Competition and on plans generated by several state-of-the-art planners, successful in the recent editions of the competition.
KR Conference 2021 Conference Paper
Planning and acting in dynamic environments deals with non-deterministic events that might change the state of the environment without consent of the agent. In the worst case, some events might cause the agent to become ``trapped'' in a dead-end state, which in practice might mean damage or destruction of the agent. Presence of non-deterministic events often considerably increases the number of alternatives that might occur in a single step and hence traditional non-deterministic planning techniques might not scale. In this paper, we address a class of problems where non-deterministic events represent ``cyclic phenomena''. If they interfere with the agent, they might be dangerous for it (e. g. ships cruising through the area of AUV operations). We present techniques that initially analyse the problem whether it falls within this class by considering the notion of event reversibility and if so, these techniques generate a plan such that encountered unsafe states, in which the ``cyclic phenomena'' might interfere with the agent, can be eventually crossed without any risk of ``falling'' into a dead-end state. Our approach is evaluated in the AUV and Perestroika domains.