Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTsuneto, Reiko
dc.contributor.authorErol, Kutluhan
dc.contributor.authorHendler, Jim
dc.contributor.authorNau, Dana
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-18T02:42:11Z
dc.date.available2022-02-18T02:42:11Z
dc.date.issued1996-08-08
dc.identifier.other447
dc.identifier.urihttp://archive.tw.rpi.edu/media/latest/tsuneto1996commitment.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13015/4849
dc.description.abstractThis paper compares three commitment strategies for HTN planning: (1) a strategy that delays variable bindings as much as possible; (2) a strategy in which no non-primitive task is expanded until all variable constraints are committed; and (3) a strategy that chooses between expansion and variable instantiation based on the number of branches that will be created in the search tree. Our results show that while there exist planning domains in which the first two strategies do well, the third does well over a broader range of planning domains.
dc.titleCommitment Strategies in Hierarchical Task Network Planning


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record