Plan Constraints and Preferences in PDDL3
By Alfonso Emilio Gerevini, Derek Long. 2006
300 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/74b39a831fd60d97f1634299c5bb7efa5bbceb03
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Pascal Kerschke
- Alfonso Emilio Gerevini
- Malte Helmert
- Patrik Haslum
- F. Neumann
- Sergio Jiménez Celorrio
- Holger H. Hoos
- Heike Trautmann
Citations in the corpus
- Automated Algorithm Selection: Survey and Perspectives (2018, background): “ same set of specific predicates and operators. Planning domains and instances can be concisely described in a widely used, uniform language called PDDL (Planning Domain Definition Language; see, e.g., Gerevini and Long, 2005). Howe et al. (1999) were among the first to characterise AI planning instanc”
- Deterministic planning in the fifth international planning competition: PDDL3 and experimental evaluation of the planners (2009, background): “For the fifth planning competition, PDDL was extended to include two important new features [31, 32].”
- A review of generalized planning (2019, background): “Besides classical planning, PDDL can represent more expressive planning models such as temporal planning or planning with path constraints and preferences (Fox and Long, 2003; Gerevini and Long, 2005).”
- Concise finite-domain representations for PDDL planning tasks (2009, background): “Since then, the language has been extended to more easily express additional aspects of real-world planning tasks, such as numbers and durations [21], state variables whose values are derived from the values of other state variables [18], and most recently plan constraints and preferences [24].”