Critique of the Semantics of STRIPS


Notes from: Vladimir Lifschitz, On the Semantics of STRIPS. In M. P. Georgeff & A. L. Lansky (Eds.) Reasoning about Actions and Plans. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman, 1987.Pp. 1-9.

Operators and Plans

Begin with an arbitrary first-order language, L. A world model is any set of sentences of L. An operator description is a triple (P,D,A), where P is a sentence of L (the precondition), and D and A are sets of sentences of L (the delete list and the add list).

Example of the operator push(k,m,n) for pushing object k from m to n :

   
where ATR(x) means that the robot is at location x ; and AT(x,y) means that the object x is at location y .
   

Predicate symbols of the Fikes and Nilsson 1971 STRIPS system:

ATR(x): the robot is at location x ,

AT(x,y): the object x is at location y ,

TYPE(x,y): x is an object of type y ,

CONNECTS(x,y ,z): door x connects room y with room z )

NEXTTO(x,y): object x is next to object y ,

INROOM(x,y): object x is in room y ,

STATUS(x,y): the status of lightswitch x is y ,

An Initial Model has ground atoms such as:

TYPE(DOOR1, DOOR)

CONNECTS(DOOR1, ROOM1, ROOM5)

INROOM(ROBOT,ROOM1)

STATUS(LIGHTSWITCH1,OFF)

and one universally quantified formula,

   

Some of the operators are:

goto1(m): robot goes to location m

goto2(m): robot goes next to item m

pushto(m,n): robot pushes object m next to object n

gothrudoor(k,l,m): robot goes thru door k from room l to room m

turnlighton(m): robot turns on lightswitch m

 

Given a STRIPS system S , a plan is defined as any finite sequence of its operators. Each plan a = ( a1, ..., aN) defines a sequence of world models M0, M1, ..., MN, where M0 is the initial world model and

 

Mi = ( Mi-1 \ D ai) » A ai (i = 1, ... , N) (2)

 

We say that a is accepted by the system if

 

Mi-1 |- P ai (i = 1, ... , N) (3)

 

In this case, MN is called result executing a and denote it by R( a ).

 

So now to a first version of a semantics for STRIPS. The world is described by a language, L and at any instant in time in a certain state. One of the states, s0, is selected as the intitial state. We assume that it is defined for each state s which sentences of L are (known to be) satisfied in this state, and that the set of sentences satisfied in state s is closed under predicate logic (??) An action is a partial function f from states to states. If f(s) is defined then we say that f is applicable in state s, and that f(s) is the result of the action. We assume that an action f a is associated with each operator a. A STRIPS system along with this additional information will be called an interpreted STRIPS system. A world model M of an interpreted STRIPS system S is satisfied in a state s if every element of M is satisfied in s. For each plan a = ( a1, ..., aN) of S, we define f a to be the composite action f aN ... f a1 .

 

Consider a fixed interpreted STRIPS system S = (M0, {(Pa,Da,Aa)}aop). Under what conditions can S be considered sound.

 

Definition A. An operator description (P,D,A) is sound relative to an action f if, for every state s such that P is satisfied in s,

(i) f is applicable in state s,

(ii) every sentence which is satisfied in s and does not belong to D is satisfied in f(s),

(iii) A is satisfied in f(s)

 

S is sound if M0 is satisfied in the initial state s0, and each operator description (Pa,Da,Aa) is sound relative to f a.

 

Soundness Theorem. If S is sound and a plan a is accepted by S, then the action f a is applicable in the initial state s0 , and the world model R( a ) is satisfied in the state f a (s0 ).

 

Problem, Def. A eliminates all the usual STRIPS systems as "unsound"....Problem is with ii. To make the delete list complete it would have to include all sentences that might become false which includes conjunctions that include a statement in the delete set as well as the disjunction of these sentences in the delete list, and in general any sentence that includes a sentence from the delete list conjoined with any sentence F where F is provable in predicate logic. (e.g. push(k,m,n) not only ATR(m ), AT(k,m ) must be deleted, but also ATR(m ) × AT(k,m ), ATR(m ) × F, etc.) So the delete list will become infinite and perhaps even non-recursive!


Definition B. An operator description (P,D,A) is sound relative to an action f if, for every state s such that P is satisfied in s,

(i) f is applicable in state s,

(ii) every atomic sentence which is satisfied in s and does not belong to D is satisfied in f(s),

(iii) A is satisfied in f(s)

(iv) every non-atomic sentence in A is satisfied in all states of the world

 

S is sound if

(v) M0 is satisfied in the initial state s0,

(vi) every non-atomic sentence in M0 is satisfied in all states of the world,

(vii)every operator description (Pa,Da,Aa) is sound relative to f a.

 

The Soundness Theorem remains valid for the new definition.


Definition C. An operator description (P,D,A) is sound relative to an action f if, for every state s such that P is satisfied in s,

(i) f is applicable in state s,

(ii) every essential sentence which is satisfied in s and does not belong to D is satisfied in f(s),

(iii) A is satisfied in f(s)

(iv) every sentence in A which is not essential is satisfied in all states of the world

 

S is sound if

(v) M0 is satisfied in the initial state s0,

(vi) every sentence in M0 which is not essential is satisfied in all states of the world,

(vii) every operator description (Pa,Da,Aa) is sound relative to f a.


Topics-Part II

STRIPS Introduction

Triangle Table

 
© Charles F. Schmidt