TL;DR
This paper discusses the design choices of PDDL 2.1 for handling time and concurrency, and explores methodological issues related to expressive planning languages and the balance between semantics and computation.
Contribution
It provides a critical analysis of PDDL 2.1's language features and discusses broader methodological considerations in planning research.
Findings
PDDL 2.1 incorporates specific features for time and concurrency.
The paper highlights the trade-offs between language expressiveness and computational complexity.
It emphasizes the importance of balancing semantics and computation in planning language development.
Abstract
I comment on the PDDL 2.1 language and its use in the planning competition, focusing on the choices made for accommodating time and concurrency. I also discuss some methodological issues that have to do with the move toward more expressive planning languages and the balance needed in planning research between semantics and computation.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.