Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Task Planning in Robotics: an Empirical Comparison of PDDL-based and ASP-based Systems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1804.08229 v3 pith:NUMHTSWL submitted 2018-04-23 cs.AI

classification cs.AI
keywords planningplannerstaskproblemspddl-basedusedactionactions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Robots need task planning algorithms to sequence actions toward accomplishing goals that are impossible through individual actions. Off-the-shelf task planners can be used by intelligent robotics practitioners to solve a variety of planning problems. However, many different planners exist, each with different strengths and weaknesses, and there are no general rules for which planner would be best to apply to a given problem. In this article, we empirically compare the performance of state-of-the-art planners that use either the Planning Domain Description Language (PDDL), or Answer Set Programming (ASP) as the underlying action language. PDDL is designed for task planning, and PDDL-based planners are widely used for a variety of planning problems. ASP is designed for knowledge-intensive reasoning, but can also be used for solving task planning problems. Given domain encodings that are as similar as possible, we find that PDDL-based planners perform better on problems with longer solutions, and ASP-based planners are better on tasks with a large number of objects or in which complex reasoning is required to reason about action preconditions and effects. The resulting analysis can inform selection among general purpose planning systems for particular robot task planning domains.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Language and Planning in Robotic Navigation: A Multilingual Evaluation of State-of-the-Art Models

    cs.CL 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Arabic instructions on the R2R navigation task preserve much of GPT-4o mini's success rate but push Phi-3 and Jais to zero, indicating model capability rather than language is the decisive factor.

Pith tools