HSPr

From: Christophe Bisciglia (chrisrb_at_cs.washington.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 10:51:14 PDT

  • Next message: Daniel Hasselrot: "Review"

    B. Bonet and H. Geffner Planning as Search: New Results ECP

    This paper shows how a new look at heuristic state space search can
    compete with other planners in the STRIPS domain by automatically
    generating the heuristic from the state space.

    The most important idea in the paper was reversing the direction of the
    search. By using a regression search, the algorithm spends much less time
    exploring irrelevant actions. In addition to this, HSPr uses a different
    mutex definition, and generates it quickly by composing an approximation
    of the largest mutex set. Although this is admittedly incomplete, the
    paper claimed it caught most mutex relationships, and allowed many nodes
    to be pruned.

    The other main idea of the paper was how the heuristic was computed. In
    HSP, 85% of the time was spent computing the heuristic. In HSPr, the
    heuristic is computed once to estimate the cost to the initial state from
    the goal, all subsequent heuristic values are defined in terms of this
    initial value. This savings in computation, combined with regression
    search allows HSPr to explore far more nodes than HSP, and in general come
    discover better plans.

    The largest flaw in the paper was the experimental results. The feeling
    I.m left with is it.s obvious that HSPr (and HSP for that matter)
    outperform other planners in the 2 domains tested. but what others. This
    makes me wonder if there is something fundamentally different about HSPr
    that harms its performance in the more general sense. And if there isn.t
    such a difference, why weren.t more domains discussed. The other thing
    that didn.t sit well with me were (as others have mentioned) that
    GraphPlan is a form of heuristic search. Although some argument was made,
    it was far from fully convincing. I feel if they weren.t going to
    completely support their claim, it should have been left out.

    In my mind, it was clear that the largest open question presented by this
    paper was whether or not an admissible heuristic could be found that was
    as informative as the one currently in use. If this were possible, it
    would open the door to using optimal heuristic search algorithms such as
    A* or IDA*.


  • Next message: Daniel Hasselrot: "Review"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 10:51:15 PDT