@inproceedings {icaps16-130,
    track    = {​Main Track},
    title    = {Practical Undoability Checking via Contingent Planning},
    url      = {http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICAPS/ICAPS16/paper/view/13091},
    author   = {Jeanette Daum and  Álvaro Torralba and  Joerg Hoffmann and  Patrik Haslum and  Ingo Weber},
    abstract = {We consider a general concept of undoability, asking whether a given
action can always be undone, no matter which state it is applied
to. This generalizes previous concepts of invertibility, and is
relevant for search as well as applications. Naive undoability
checking requires to enumerate all states an action is applicable
to. Extending and operationalizing prior work in this direction, we
introduce a compilation into contingent planning, replacing such
enumeration by standard techniques handling large belief states.  We
furthermore introduce compilations for checking whether one can always
get back to an at-least-as-good state, as well as for determining
partial undoability, i.e., undoability on a subset of states an action
is applicable to.  Our experiments on IPC benchmarks and in a cloud
management application show that contingent planners are often
effective at solving this kind of problem, hence providing a practical
means for undoability checking.},
    keywords = {Conformant/contingent planning,Planning under (non-probabilistic) uncertainty}
}

{"_id":"gX7cLeLMGN4Abs999","bibbaseid":"daum-torralba-hoffmann-haslum-weber-practicalundoabilitycheckingviacontingentplanning","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-03-09T03:04:32.783Z","title":"Practical Undoability Checking via Contingent Planning","author_short":["Daum, J.","Torralba, Á.","Hoffmann, J.","Haslum, P.","Weber, I."],"year":null,"bibtype":"inproceedings","biburl":"icaps16.icaps-conference.org/papers.bib","bibdata":{"bibtype":"inproceedings","type":"inproceedings","track":"​Main Track","title":"Practical Undoability Checking via Contingent Planning","url":"http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICAPS/ICAPS16/paper/view/13091","author":[{"firstnames":["Jeanette"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Daum"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Álvaro"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Torralba"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Joerg"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Hoffmann"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Patrik"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Haslum"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Ingo"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Weber"],"suffixes":[]}],"abstract":"We consider a general concept of undoability, asking whether a given action can always be undone, no matter which state it is applied to. This generalizes previous concepts of invertibility, and is relevant for search as well as applications. Naive undoability checking requires to enumerate all states an action is applicable to. Extending and operationalizing prior work in this direction, we introduce a compilation into contingent planning, replacing such enumeration by standard techniques handling large belief states. We furthermore introduce compilations for checking whether one can always get back to an at-least-as-good state, as well as for determining partial undoability, i.e., undoability on a subset of states an action is applicable to. Our experiments on IPC benchmarks and in a cloud management application show that contingent planners are often effective at solving this kind of problem, hence providing a practical means for undoability checking.","keywords":"Conformant/contingent planning,Planning under (non-probabilistic) uncertainty","bibtex":"@inproceedings {icaps16-130,\r\n track = {​Main Track},\r\n title = {Practical Undoability Checking via Contingent Planning},\r\n url = {http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICAPS/ICAPS16/paper/view/13091},\r\n author = {Jeanette Daum and Álvaro Torralba and Joerg Hoffmann and Patrik Haslum and Ingo Weber},\r\n abstract = {We consider a general concept of undoability, asking whether a given\r\naction can always be undone, no matter which state it is applied\r\nto. This generalizes previous concepts of invertibility, and is\r\nrelevant for search as well as applications. Naive undoability\r\nchecking requires to enumerate all states an action is applicable\r\nto. Extending and operationalizing prior work in this direction, we\r\nintroduce a compilation into contingent planning, replacing such\r\nenumeration by standard techniques handling large belief states. We\r\nfurthermore introduce compilations for checking whether one can always\r\nget back to an at-least-as-good state, as well as for determining\r\npartial undoability, i.e., undoability on a subset of states an action\r\nis applicable to. Our experiments on IPC benchmarks and in a cloud\r\nmanagement application show that contingent planners are often\r\neffective at solving this kind of problem, hence providing a practical\r\nmeans for undoability checking.},\r\n keywords = {Conformant/contingent planning,Planning under (non-probabilistic) uncertainty}\r\n}\r\n\r\n","author_short":["Daum, J.","Torralba, Á.","Hoffmann, J.","Haslum, P.","Weber, I."],"key":"icaps16-130","id":"icaps16-130","bibbaseid":"daum-torralba-hoffmann-haslum-weber-practicalundoabilitycheckingviacontingentplanning","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICAPS/ICAPS16/paper/view/13091"},"keyword":["Conformant/contingent planning","Planning under (non-probabilistic) uncertainty"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"search_terms":["practical","undoability","checking","via","contingent","planning","daum","torralba","hoffmann","haslum","weber"],"keywords":["conformant/contingent planning","planning under (non-probabilistic) uncertainty"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["iMkx859KiXcegwsin","EZtZjCTnxcdTTyeij"]}