层次任务网络中的重新规划研究综述

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-506X.2020.12.21

系统工程与电子技术 ›› 2020, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (12): 2833-2846.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-506X.2020.12.21

层次任务网络中的重新规划研究综述

邵天浩¹(), 张宏军¹(), 程恺^1,*(), 戴成友²(), 余晓晗¹(), 张可¹()

1. 陆军工程大学指挥控制工程学院, 江苏南京 210007
2. 中国人民解放军95429部队, 云南昆明 650000

收稿日期:2020-03-01 出版日期:2020-12-01 发布日期:2020-11-27
通讯作者: 程恺 E-mail:605862558@qq.com;jsnjzhj@263.net;chengkai911@126.com;376679530@qq.com;yu_xiaohan@sina.cn;2387303531@qq.com
作者简介:邵天浩(1996-),男,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为任务规划、智能控制。E-mail:605862558@qq.com|张宏军(1963-),男,教授,博士研究生导师,博士,主要研究方向为人工智能、作战规划、机器学习。E-mail:jsnjzhj@263.net|戴成友(1982-),男,工程师,硕士,主要研究方向为作战规划、机器学习。E-mail:376679530@qq.com|余晓晗(1985-),男,副教授,博士,主要研究方向为智能规划、多准则决策。E-mail:yu_xiaohan@sina.cn|张可(1996-),女,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为软件工程、数据挖掘。E-mail:2387303531@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(61806221);国防科技创新特区项目(19-163-11-LZ-001-003-01)

Review of replanning in hierarchical task network

Tianhao SHAO¹(), Hongjun ZHANG¹(), Kai CHENG^1,*(), Chengyou DAI²(), Xiaohan YU¹(), Ke ZHANG¹()

1. Command and Control Engineering College, Army Engineering University, Nanjing 210007, China
2. Unit 95429 of the PLA, Kunming 650000, China

Received:2020-03-01 Online:2020-12-01 Published:2020-11-27
Contact: Kai CHENG E-mail:605862558@qq.com;jsnjzhj@263.net;chengkai911@126.com;376679530@qq.com;yu_xiaohan@sina.cn;2387303531@qq.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

层次任务网络(hierarchical task network, HTN)作为智能规划技术的重要组成部分,已成功应用于无人平台任务规划、应急方案制定等各领域中。由于日益增加的不确定因素对计划执行效果的影响,迫切需要重新规划技术,因此基于HTN的重新规划技术成为近年来的研究热点。首先,通过对当前研究现状的总结梳理,提出了基于HTN的3层重新规划框架。然后,分别从框架中的计划修复、局部重规划和全局重规划3个层次阐述了相应的技术路线与实现细节,针对不同层次指出了目前方法的优势与不足。最后,对该问题未来的研究方向进行了展望,并提出了待解决的关键问题及解决思路。

关键词: 智能规划, 层次任务网络, 计划修复, 局部重规划, 全局重规划

Abstract:

As an important part of the intelligent planning technology, hierarchical task network (HTN) is successfully applied to the task planning in unmanned aerial vehicle platform, emergency plan formulation and other fields. Due to effect the increasing uncertain factors on the implementation the influence of the plan, it is urgent to use replanning technology, thus the replanning technology based on HTN has become a hotspot in recent years. First of all, a three-layer replan framework based on HTN is proposed by summarizing the current research status. Then, the corresponding technical route and implementation details are represented from three levels of plan repair, local replanning and global replanning in the framework respectively, and the advantages and disadvantages of the current method are pointed out for different levels. Finally, the future research direction of this problem is prospected, and the key problems to be solved and the solutions are putting forward.

Key words: intelligent planning, hierarchical task network (HTN), plan repair, local replanning, global replanning

中图分类号:

TP181

邵天浩, 张宏军, 程恺, 戴成友, 余晓晗, 张可. 层次任务网络中的重新规划研究综述[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2020, 42(12): 2833-2846.

Tianhao SHAO, Hongjun ZHANG, Kai CHENG, Chengyou DAI, Xiaohan YU, Ke ZHANG. Review of replanning in hierarchical task network[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2020, 42(12): 2833-2846.

图/表 10

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

表1

参考文献 106

1	SACERDOTI E D. The nonlinear nature of plans[C]//Proc.of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1975: 206-214.
2	王红卫, 刘典, 赵鹏, 等. 不确定层次任务网络规划研究综述[J]. 自动化学报, 2016, 42 (5): 655- 667.
	WANG H W , LIU D , ZHAO P , et al. Review on hierarchical task network planning under uncertainty[J]. Acta Automatica Sinica, 2016, 42 (5): 655- 667.
3	YANG Q . Formalizing planning knowledge for hierarchical planning[J]. Computational Intelligence, 1990, 6 (1): 12- 24. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8640.1990.tb00126.x
4	KAMBHAMPATI S , HENDLER J A . A validation-structure-based theory of plan modification and reuse[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 1992, 55 (2/3): 193- 258.
5	EROL K, HENDLER J, NAU D. UMCP: a sound and complete procedure for hierarchical task-network planning[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems, 1994: 249-254.
6	EROL K. Hierarchical task-network planning systems formalization, analysis, and implementation[D]. Maryland: University of Maryland, 1995.
7	NAU D , AU T C , ILGHAMI O , et al. SHOP2: an HTN planning system[J]. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2011, 20 (1): 379- 404.
8	NAU D , AU T C , ILGHAMI O , et al. Applications of SHOP and SHOP2[J]. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2005, 20 (2): 34- 41. doi: 10.1109/MIS.2005.20
9	ILGHAMI O. Documentation for JSHOP2[R]. Maryland: University of Maryland, 2006.
10	MUNOZ-AVILA H, AHA D W, NAU D, et al. SiN integrating case-based reasoning with task decomposition[C]//Proc.of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2001: 999-1004.
11	WARFIELD I, HOGG C, LEE-URBAN S, et al. Adaptation of hierarchical task network plans[C]//Proc.of the International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Confe-rence, 2007: 429-434.
12	FINE-MORRIS M, MUNOZ-AVILA H. Learning domain structure in HGNs for nondeterministic planning[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2019: 22-30.
13	AYAN N F, KUTER U, YAMAN F, et al. HOTRiDE: hie-rarchical ordered task replanning in dynamic environments[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2007: 31-36.
14	KUTER U, MILLER C. Computational mechanisms to support reporting of self confidence of automated/autonomous systems[C]//Proc.of the AAAI Fall Symposium Series: Self-Confidence in Autonomous Systems, 2015: 18-21.
15	GOPALAKRISHNAN S , MUNOZ-AVILA H , KUTER U . Learning task hierarchies using statistical semantics and goal reasoning[J]. AI Communication, 2016, 31 (2): 167- 180.
16	BEHNKE G, HOLLER D, BERCHER P. Hierarchical planning in the IPC[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2019: 6-14.
17	BEHNKE G, HOLLER D, BIUNDO S. Bringing order to chaos-a compact representation of partial order in SAT-based HTN planning[C]//Proc.of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019: 1562-1571.
18	BEHNKE G, HOLLER D, BIUNDO S. Finding optimal solutions in HTN planning-a SAT-based approach[C]//Proc.of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019: 20-28.
19	GEORGIEVSKI I , AIELLO M . Automated planning for ubiquitous computing[J]. ACM Computing Surveys, 2016, 49 (4): 1- 46.
20	GEORGIEVSKI I , NGUYEN T A , NIZAMIC F , et al. Planning meets activity recognition: service coordination for intelligent buildings[J]. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 2017, 38, 110- 139. doi: 10.1016/j.pmcj.2017.02.008
21	KALKSMA M, SETZ B, RIZKY P A, et al. Mining sequential patterns for appliance usage prediction[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems, 2018: 23-33.
22	王红卫, 祁超. 基于层次任务网络规划的应急响应决策理论与方法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2015.
	WANG H W , QI C . Hierarchical task network planning based emergency response decision making theory and method[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2015.
23	唐攀, 祁超, 王红卫. 基于层次任务网络规划的应急行动方案制定方法[J]. 管理评论, 2016, 28 (8): 43- 50.
	TANG P , QI C , WANG H W . Emergency response action plan development based on hierarchical task network planning[J]. Management Review, 2016, 28 (8): 43- 50.
24	SUKTHANKAR G , GEIB C , BUI H H , et al. Plan, activity and intent recognition[M]. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 2014: 227- 249.
25	ZHUO H H , KAMBHAMPATI S . Model-lite planning: case-based vs. model-based approaches[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2017, 246, 1- 21. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2017.01.004
26	TANG M, CAI J, ZHUO H H. Multi-matching network for multiple choice reading comprehension[C]//Proc.of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019: 7088-7095.
27	张家铭, 刘忠, 石建迈, 等. 考虑飞行初段弹道交叉的多导弹协同发射时序规划方法[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2017, 39 (2): 316- 321.
	ZHANG J M , LIU Z , SHI J M , et al. Fire scheduling for multiple missiles cooperative engagement considering trajectory intersection during the initial flight phase[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2017, 39 (2): 316- 321.
28	张迎新, 陈超, 刘忠, 等. 资源不确定军事任务计划预测调度模型与算法[J]. 国防科技大学学报, 2013, 35 (3): 33- 38.
	ZHANG Y X , CHEN C , LIU Z , et al. Method for modeling and solving military mission planning with uncertain resource availability[J]. Jouranl of National University of Defense Technology, 2013, 35 (3): 33- 38.
29	罗旭辉, 刘忠, 张维明, 等. 层次任务网络的作战计划建模及生成技术[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2009, 34 (12): 24- 28.
	LUO X H , LIU Z , ZHANG W M , et al. Research on mode-ling and generation of operational plan based on hierarchical task-network[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2009, 34 (12): 24- 28.
30	姜鑫, 杜正军, 王长春, 等. 不确定性环境下的多阶段军事对抗决策方法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2013, 33 (8): 2163- 2168.
	JIANG X , DU Z J , WANG C C , et al. Method of multistage military conflict decision-making in uncertainty environments[J]. Systems Engineering-Therory & Practice, 2013, 33 (8): 2163- 2168.
31	BIUNDO S, SCHATTENBERG B. From abstract crisis to concrete relief-a preliminary report on combining state abstraction and HTN planning[C]//Proc.of the European Conference on Planning, 2001: 157-168.
32	曲源超.基于层次任务网络的军事计划优化方法研究[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学, 2010.
	QU Y C. Reseach on the method of military planning optimum based on hierarchical task network[D]. Changsha: National University of Defense Technology, 2010.
33	XU X , JU R S , LIU X C , et al. Extending HTN to planning and execution control for small combat unit simulation[J]. International Journal of Modeling, Simulation, and Scientific Computing, 2017, 8 (2): 1- 18.
34	肖海, 刘新学, 舒健生, 等. 基于扩展HTN规划的作战任务分析方法[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2016, 41 (9): 108- 111.
	XIAO H , LIU X X , SHU J S , et al. Research on operational task analysis method based on extended HTN planning[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2016, 41 (9): 108- 111.
35	耿松涛, 操新文, 李晓宁, 等. 基于扩展层级任务网络的联合作战电子对抗任务分解方法[J]. 装甲兵工程学院学报, 2018, 32 (5): 8- 13.
	GENG S T , CAO X W , LI X N , et al. Joint operations electronic countermeasures task decomposition method based on extended hierarchical task network[J]. Journal of Academy of Armored Force Engineering, 2018, 32 (5): 8- 13.
36	孙林, 焦鹏, 许凯. 基于改进分层任务网的指控行为模型[J]. 计算机科学, 2017, 44 (S1): 519- 522.
	SUN L , JIAO P , XU K . Command and control behavior model based on improved hierarchical task network[J]. Computer Science, 2017, 44 (S1): 519- 522.
37	汪鑫, 高岩, 陈逸, 等. 作战班组层次行为建模[J]. 计算机工程与应用, 2020, 56 (12): 250- 255.
	WANG X , GAO Y , CHEN Y , et al. Combat team's hierarchical behavior modeling[J]. Computer Engineering and Applications, 2020, 56 (12): 250- 255.
38	LEE S M. Hierarchical planning knowledge for refining partial-order plans[D]. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: Lehigh University, 2012.
39	GATEAU T, LESIRE C, BARBIER M. HiDDeN: cooperative plan execution and repair for heterogeneous robots in dynamic environments[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2013: 4790-4795.
40	宋沐民, 路飞, 陆娜, 等. 智能空间下基于分层任务网络的服务机器人任务规划[J]. 控制理论与应用, 2014, 31 (7): 83- 89.
	SONG M M , LU F , LU N , et al. Task planning for service robot with hierarchical task network in intelligent space[J]. Control Theory & Applications, 2014, 31 (7): 83- 89.
41	宋月.基于HTN的无人机任务规划的研究与仿真分析[D].北京:北京邮电大学, 2019.
	SONG Y. Reasearch and simulation analysis of task planning for UAV based on HTN[D]. Beijing: Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, 2019.
42	SIRIN E , PARSIA B , WU D , et al. HTN planning for web service composition using SHOP2[J]. Web Semantics, 2004, 1 (4): 377- 396. doi: 10.1016/j.websem.2004.06.005
43	HRISTOSKOVA A, VOLCKAERT B, TURCK F D. Dyna-mic composition of semantically annotated web services through QoS-aware HTN planning algorithms[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Internet and Web Applications and Ser-vices, 2009: 337-382.
44	王喆, 王世昌, 李明磊, 等. 层次任务网络规划在应急物流方案制定中的应用研究[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2017, 24 (5): 15- 20.
	WANG Z , WANG S C , LI M L , et al. Research on application of HTN planning in emergency logistics program formulation[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2017, 24 (5): 15- 20.
45	NAVEED M, KITCHIN D, CRAMPTON A. A hierarchical task network planner for pathfinding in real-time strategy games[C]//Proc.of the International Symposium on AI & Games, 2010.
46	VERWEIJ T. A hierarchically-layered multiplayer bot system for a first-person shooter[D]. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam, 2007.
47	ROBERTSON G , WATSON I . A review of real-time strategy game AI[J]. AI Magazine, 2014, 35 (4): 75- 104. doi: 10.1609/aimag.v35i4.2478
48	DONALDSON M J. Modeling dynamic tactical behaviors in COMBATXXI using hierarchical task networks[D]. Monte-rey: Naval Postgraduate School, 2014.
49	罗文杰, 杨佩, 王皓, 等. FPS游戏中基于HTN的Anytime规划器的研究[J]. 计算机工程与应用, 2008, 44 (21): 92- 95.
	LUO W J , YANG P , WANG H , et al. Reasearch of HTN-based anytime planner in FPS games[J]. Computer Engineering and Applications, 2008, 44 (21): 92- 95.
50	LAAVERI T. Integrating AI for turn-based 4X Strategy game[D]. Helsinki: University of Applied Sciences, 2017.
51	LIN S , JIAO P , XU K , et al. Modified adversarial hierarchical task network planning in real-time strategy games[J]. Applied Sciences, 2017, 7 (9): 872- 895. doi: 10.3390/app7090872
52	SANCHEZ-GARZON I, FDEZ-OLIVARES J, CASTILLO L. A repair-replanning strategy for HTN-based therapy planning systems[C]//Proc.of the Conferencia De La Asociacion Espa-nola de Inteligencia Artificial, 2011.
53	SANCHEZ-GARZON I, FDEZ-OLIVARES J, CASTILLO L. Monitoring, repair and replanning techniques to support excepti-on handling in HTN-based therapy planning systems[C]//Proc.of the Conferencia De La Asociación Española de Inteligencia Artificial, 2011: 33-42.
54	FDEZ-OLIVARES J, SANCHEZ-GARZON I, GONZALEZ-FERRER A, et al. Task network based modeling, dynamic generation and adaptive execution of patient-tailored treatment plans based on smart process management technologies[C]//Proc.of the Knowledge Representation for Health Care, 2011: 37-50.
55	JIN L, DECHER K S, SCHMIDT C J. Bio-planner a plan adaptation approach for the discovery of biological pathways across species[C]//Proc.of the Innovative Applications of Aritificial Conference, 2009: 99-106.
56	HAYASHI H, CHO K, OHSUGA A. A new HTN planning framework for agents in dynamic environments[C]//Proc.of the International Workshop on Computational Logic in Multiagent Systems, 2004: 108-133.
57	MYERS K L . CPEF: a continuous planning and execution framework[J]. AI Magazine, 1999, 20 (4): 63- 69.
58	KROGT R V D, WEERDT M D. Plan repair as an extension of planning[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2005: 161-170.
59	OUALI L O, RICH C, SABOURET N. Plan recovery in reactive HTNs using symbolic planning[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Artificial General Intelligence, 2015: 320-330.
60	XU X , YANG M , LI G . Adaptive CGF commander behavior mode-ling through HTN guided Monte Carlo tree search[J]. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2018, 27 (2): 231- 249.
61	BECHON P, BARBIER M, LESIRE C, et al. Using hybrid planning for plan reparation[C]//Proc.of the European Confe-rence on Mobile Robots, 2015.
62	QI C , WANG D . Dynamic aircraft carrier flight deck task planning based on HTN[J]. IFAC Papersonline, 2016, 49 (12): 1608- 1613. doi: 10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.07.810
63	曾素颖.动态环境下航母甲板任务规划方案修复与重规划方法研究[D].武汉:华中科技大学, 2017.
	ZENG S Y. Aircraft carrier deck task plan repair and replanning research under dynamic[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 2017.
64	SOEMERS D J N J, WINANDS M H M. Hierarchical task network plan reuse for video games[C]//Proc.of the IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games, 2016: 78-84.
65	URO M. Adversarial hierarchical-task network planning for complex real-time games[C]//Proc.of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2015: 1652-1658.
66	HOLLER D, BERCHER P, BEHNKE, et al. HTN plan repair using unmodified planning systems[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2018: 26-30.
67	TATE A. Generating project networks[C]//Proc.of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1977: 888-893.
68	WILKINS D E . Domain-independent planning representation and plan generation[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 1984, 22 (3): 269- 301.
69	WILKINS D E . Can AI planners solve practical problems[J]. Computational Intelligence, 1990, 6 (4): 232- 246. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8640.1990.tb00297.x
70	CURRIE K , TATE A . O-plan: the open planning architecture[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 1991, 52 (1): 49- 86.
71	TATE A , DRABBLE B , KIRBY R . O-plan2: an open architecture for command, planning and control[M]. San Francisco: Morgan kaufmann, 1994.
72	GEORGIEVSKI I , AIELLO M . HTN planning: overview, comparison, and beyond[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2015, 222, 124- 156. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2015.02.002
73	HIATT L M. Probabilistic plan management[D]. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University, 2009.
74	刘园园.水下机器人规划修复方法研究[D].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学, 2014.
	LIU Y Y. Research on planning repair for autonomous underwater vehicle[D]. Harbin: Harbin Engineering University, 2014.
75	BIDOT J, SCHATTENBERG B, BIUNDO S. Plan repair in hybrid planning[C]//Proc.of the German Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2008: 169-176.
76	GOLDMAN R P, MARAIST J. Shopper a system for executing and simulating expressive plans[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2010: 230-233.
77	GHALLAB M , NAU D , TRAVERSO P . Automated planning and acting[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
78	ZUCKERMAN I , WILSON B , NAU D . Avoiding gametree pathology in two player adversarial search[J]. Computational Intelligence, 2018, 34 (2): 542- 561. doi: 10.1111/coin.12162
79	PATRA S , GHALLAB M , NAU D. , et al. APE: an acting and planning engine[J]. Cognitive Systems, 2019, 7, 175- 194.
80	NAU D, GHALLAB M, TRAVERSO P. Blended planning and acting: Preliminary approach, research challenges[C]//Proc.of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2015: 4047-4051.
81	PATRA S, TRAVERSO P, GHALLAB M, et al. Planning and acting with hierarchical input/output automata[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling Workshop on Generalized Planning, 2017: 15-23.
82	HASLUM P , IVANKOVIC F , RAMIREZ M , et al. Extending classical planning with state constraints: heuristics and search for optimal planning[J]. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2018, 62, 373- 431. doi: 10.1613/jair.1.11213
83	PATRA S, MASON J, KUMAR A, et al. Integrating acting, planning, and learning in hierarchical operational models[C]//Proc.of the 30th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2020.
84	PATRA S, GHALLAB M, NAU D. Interleaving acting and planning using operational models[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2019: 46-54.
85	宋泾舸, 查建中, 陆一平. HTN规划中面向多计划生成的顺序任务分解算法[J]. 北京交通大学学报, 2009, 33 (4): 46- 49.
	SONG J G , ZHA J Z , LU Y P . Multiple plans oriented OTD algorithm for HTN planning[J]. Journal of Beijing Jiaotong University, 2009, 33 (4): 46- 49.
86	ZHANG W P , SHEN L C , CHEN J . Learning and fatigue inspired method for optimized HTN planning[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2012, 23 (2): 233- 241. doi: 10.1109/JSEE.2012.00030
87	HOLLER D, BEHNKE G, BERCHER P, et al. HDDL-a language to describe hierarchical planning problems[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2019: 6-14.
88	BERCHER P, BIUNDO S, GEIER T, et al. Plan, repair, exe-cute, explain-how planning helps to assemble your home theater[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2014: 386-394.
89	NEUFELD X, MOSTAGHIM S, PEREZ-LIEBANA D. HTN fighter: planning in a highly-dynamic game[C]//Proc.of the Computer Science and Electronic Engineering, 2017: 189-194.
90	GREA A, MATIGNON L, AKNINE S. HEART: hierarchical abstraction for real-time partial order causal link planning[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2018: 17-25.
91	HAYASHI H , TOKURA S , OZAKI F . Towards real-world HTN planning agents[J]. Knowledge Processing and Decision Making in Agent-Based Systems, 2009, 170, 13- 42.
92	MOLINEAUX M, KLENK M, AHA D W. Goal-driven autono-my in a navy strategy simulation[C]//Proc.of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2010: 1548-1554.
93	GATEAU T, BARBIER M, LESIRECABANIOLS C. Local plan exertion and repair in a hierarchical structure of sub-teams of heterogeneous autonomous vehicles[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2010.
94	GATEAU T, SEVERAC G, LESIRE C. et al. Knowledge base for planning, execution and plan repair[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2012: 39-46.
95	刘海涛.水下机器人任务规划与重规划技术研究[D].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学, 2013.
	LIU H T. Research on mission planning and re-planning for AUV[D]. Harbin: Harbin Engineering University, 2013.
96	BEHNKE G, HOLLER D, BERCHER P, et al. Change the plan-how hard can that be[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2016: 38-46.
97	王晓晖.动态不确定环境下深空探测器自主任务规划方法研究[D].南京:南京航空航天大学, 2017.
	WANG X H. Study on autonomous mission planning technology for deep space explorer under dynamic uncertain environment[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2017.
98	PATRA S, GHALLAB M, NAU D, et al. Acting and planning using operational models[C]//Proc.of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019: 23-30.
99	LI M L , WANG H W , QI C . A novel HTN planning approach for handling disruption during plan execution[J]. Applied Intelligence, 2016, 46 (4): 1- 10.
100	ALFORD R. Search complexities for HTN planning[D]. Maryland: University of Maryland, 2016.
101	CHENG K , WU L , YU X H , et al. Improving hierarchical task network planning performance by the use of domain-independent heuristic search[J]. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2018, 142, 117- 126. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2017.11.031
102	HOLLER D, BERCHER P, BEHNKE G, et al. On guiding search in HTN planning with classical planning heuristics[C]//Proc.of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019.
103	WINER D R, ROGELIO E, RIVERA C. A depth-balanced approach to decompositional planning for problems where hierarchical depth is reque[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2018.
104	BEHNKE G, HOLLER D, BERCHER P, et al. More succinct grounding of HTN planning problems-preliminary results[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2019: 40-48.
105	SZULYOVSZKY B. Reasoning over hierarchical task workflows in robust robot planning[D]. Austria: Management Center Innsbruck, 2015.
106	XIAO Z H, WAN H, ZHUO H H, et al. Learning HTN methods with preference from htn planning instance[C]//Proc.of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, 2019: 31-39.

重新规划中的技术方法	速度	稳定性	相关性	实现难度	环境适应性
基于修复规则库的计划修复	快	高	强	中	劣
基于符号模型的计划修复	快	中	中	低	劣
基于标志位的局部重规划	中	低	弱	中	中
基于依赖关系的局部重规划	慢	高	强	高	中
基于模型拓展的全局重规划	慢	中	中	高	优
基于限制行动数目的全局重规划	与N有关	低	弱	低	优

层次任务网络中的重新规划研究综述

Review of replanning in hierarchical task network

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 106

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价