Encoding plans in propositional logic

Henry Kautz, David McAllester, Bart Selman

1996 · 269 citations · 16 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Planning problems can be efficiently solved by propositional SAT algorithms, and this work builds on prior empirical evaluations of such encodings. The paper develops practical SAT reductions for STRIPS planning, presenting several sound and complete encodings—including a novel causal‑planning encoding that leverages lifting—and relates them to Graphplan. The authors present multiple SAT encodings for STRIPS, analyze their variable and formula size complexity, introduce a causal‑planning encoding that uses lifting, and further reduce variable counts by compiling away state or action variables. The novel causal‑planning encoding asymptotically dominates the other encodings.

Abstract

In recent work we showed that planning problems can be efficiently solved by general propositional satisfiability algorithms (Kautz and Selman 1996). A key issue in this approach is the development of practical reductions of planning to SAT. We introduce a series of different SAT encodings for STRIPS-style planning, which are sound and complete representations of the original STRIPS specification, and relate our encodings to the Graphplan system of Blum and Furst (1995). We analyze the size complexity of the various encodings, both in terms of number of variables and total length of the resulting formulas. This paper complements the empirical evaluation of several of the encodings reported in Kautz and Selman (1996). We also introduce a novel encoding based on the theory of causal planning, that exploits the notion of “lifting” from the theorem-proving community. This new encoding strictly dominates the others in terms of asymptotic complexity. Finally, we consider further reductions in the number of variables used by our encodings, by compiling away either statevariables or action-variables.

References

16