Novelty vs. Potential Heuristics: A Comparison of Hardness Measures for Satisficing Planning
Simon Dold, Malte Helmert
Abstract
Classical planning considers a given task and searches for a plan to solve it. Some tasks are harder to solve than others. We can measure the 'hardness' of a task with the novelty width and the correlation complexity. In this work, we compare these measures. Additionally, we introduce the river measure, a new measure that is based on potential heuristics and therefore similar to the correlation complexity but also comparable to the novelty width. We show that the river measure is upper bounded by the correlation complexity and by the novelty width +1. Furthermore, we show that we can convert a planning task with a polynomial blowup of the task size to ensure that a heuristic of dimension 2 exists that gives rise to backtrack-free search.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Related papers
- Novel Is Not Always Better: On the Relation between Novelty and Dominance PruningJoschka Groß, Álvaro Torralba, Maximilian FickertAAAI 2020 · 4 citations
- Landmark Generation in HTN PlanningDaniel Höller, Pascal BercherAAAI 2021 · 15 citations
- Computing Plan-Length Bounds Using Lengths of Longest PathsMohammad Abdulaziz, Dominik BergerAAAI 2021 · 4 citations
- Symmetries and Other Variations of "End-Recursive" HTN Problems: Mapping the Border Between Decidable and Undecidable RestrictionsHadyn Tang, Pascal BercherAAAI 2026
- Reshaping Diverse PlanningMichael Katz, Shirin SohrabiAAAI 2020 · 55 citations
