Skip to main content

Board-Laying Techniques Improve Local Search in Mixed Planning and Scheduling

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
  • 637 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2148))

Abstract

When searching the space of possible plans for combined planning and scheduling problems we often reach a local maximum and find it difficult to make further progress. To help move out of a local maximum, we can often make large steps in the search space by aggregating constraints. Our techniques improve the performance of our planner/scheduler on real problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Estlin, T., Chien, S., and Wang, X. 1997. “An Argument for an Integrated Hierarchical Task Network and Operator-based Approach to Planning,” in Recent Advances in AI Planning. S. Steel and R. Alami (eds.), Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, 1997, pp. 182–194.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Knight, R., Rabideau, G., and Chien, S. 2000. “Computing Valid Intervals for Collections of Activities with Shared States and Resources,” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling, 14–17 April 2000, pp. 339–346.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dechter, R., Meiri I., and Pearl J. 1991. “Temporal Constraint Networks,” Artificial Intelligence, 49, 1991, pp 61–95.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Rabideau, G., Knight R., Chien S., Fukunaga A., Govindjee A. 1999, “Iterative Repair Planning for Spacecraft Operations Using the ASPEN System,” iSAIRAS’ 99, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, June 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fukunaga, A., Rabideau, G., Chien, S., Yan, D. 1997. “Towards an Application Framework for Automated Planning and Scheduling,” Proc. of the 1997 International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation for Space, Tokyo, Japan, July 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sherwood, R., Govindjee, A., Yan, D., Rabideau, G., Chien, S., Fukunaga, A. 1998. “Using ASPEN to Automate EO-1 Activity Planning,” Proc. of the 1998 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Aspen, CO, March 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Zweben, M., Daun, Davis, E., and Deale, M., 1994. “Scheduling and Rescheduling with Iterative Repair,” in Intelligent Scheduling, Morgan Kaufman, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rabideau, G., Chien, S., Backes, P., Chalfant, G., and Tso, K. 1999. “A Step Towards an Autonomous Planetary Rover,” Space Technology and Applications International Forum, Albuquerque, NM, February 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Chien, G. Rabideau, J. Willis, and T. Mann, “Automating Planning and Scheduling of Shuttle Payload Operations,” Artificial Intelligence Journal, 114 (1999) 239–255.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Laborie, P., Ghallab, M. 1995. “Planning with Sharable Resource Constraints,” Proc. IJCAI-95, 1643–1649

    Google Scholar 

  11. Muscettola, N. 1993. “HSTS: Integrating Planning and Scheduling.” Intelligent Scheduling. Morgan Kaufmann, March 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Drabble, B. and Tate A. 1994. “Use of Optimistic and Pessimistic Resource Profiles to Inform Search in an Activity Based Planner,” Proc. AIPS94.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tate A., Drabble, B. and Dalton, J. 1996. “O-Plan: a Knowledge-based planner and its application to Logistics,” Advanced Planning Technology, Technological Achievements of the ARPA/RL Planning Initiative, AAAI Press, 1996, pp. 259–266.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wilkins, D., 1998. “Using the SIPE-2 Planning System: A Manual for Version 4.22.” SRI International Artificial Intelligence Center, Menlo Park, CA, November 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cesta, Oddi S., and Smith S. 1998. “Profile-Based Algorithms to Solve Multiple Capacitated Metric Scheduling Problems.” Proc. AIPS98, pp. 214–223.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Glover, F. 1989. “Tabu search.” ORSA Journal on Computing, 1(3): 190–206.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Knight, R., Rabideau, G., Chien, S. (2001). Board-Laying Techniques Improve Local Search in Mixed Planning and Scheduling. In: Nareyek, A. (eds) Local Search for Planning and Scheduling. LSPS 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2148. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45612-0_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45612-0_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42898-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45612-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics