Home
        The Use of an Integrated Tool to Support Teaching and Learning in
         Contents
1.                            amp  Commit if  Restore   Verify States       Figure 2  Substate Editor Tool    that it stands on another block  Specifying a set of Herbrand interpretations with  the expression clear Block    on Block  Block  is not adequate  as we assume that  any instantiation of a substate definition forms a valid ground substate  We require  clear Block  A on Block  Other    Block   Other using the normal conventions  for the unification of parameters     At this stage validity checks can be made to ensure that all dynamic predicates  appear in one substate definition  If a predicate is dynamic then it must appear in  at least one of the substate definitions for at least one of the sorts it refers to  On  the other hand  if it appears in a definition for more than one sort the engineer will  be warned that the formulation may contain redundant information as discussed  above  This should provide the student with an initial view as to the adequacy of  her selection of predicates to characterise the changes that the objects in the domain  undergo     2 1 Capturing Domain Operators    The next stage of the knowledge acquisition method  and most difficult task for the  student  is to specify operators representing domain actions  Operators in GIPO  are conceptualised as sets of parameterised object transitions  LHS   RHS  where  the LHS and RHS are substate classes the sort of the object parameter  An object  transition can have different modalities in an operator
2.     Domain Specifications  Task Specifications  OCL   PDDL    External Planners Le                     Figure 4  Architectural Breakdown of GIPO    Students are supported by an online three part tutorial  which introduces them to  the subject matter in a step by step fashion  by leading them to develop a simple  example domain model  Part one of the tutorial introduces the     flat    model  where  operators are primitive and separate  Part two introduces a hierarchical model of  plan operators  which amounts to a principled approach to HTN planning  Finally  part three introduces the OpMaker operator learning method  Whereas the tutorials  lead the student through the features methodically  for learning about specific fea   tures GIPO has an online  hyperlinked user manual  For those students who need  to dig deeper  for example final year project students  GIPO also has a language  manual which defines the underlying knowledge representation language     11    4 Comparison with other specification modelling tools used  in IT Teaching    It is common now for undergraduate students to be expected to understand and use  a wide range of GUI tools for constructing programs  designs and specifications   Here we describe some currently in use  in particular within our own undergraduate  degree  and compare and contrast them with GIPO     The B Toolkit  As with AI  the teaching of rigorous specification and development  of software is particularly challenging  The B toolkit  1   th
3.    normally it is necessary   which means the LHS is a precondition of the operator  and after the operator is  executed the object affected will be in the situation specified by a fully instantiated    RAS     The GIPO operator editor helps the student create a graph representation of an op   erator where the nodes are the LHS and RHS states of the object sorts involved  in the operator  Each such node contains an editable state definition  While the  use of the Operator Editor    is adequate to define operators  students have diffi   culty primarily due to the possible co designation of variables across the different  nodes presented to the user  although the underlining and right click mechanism  described in the state editor is used   Using this manual operator tool illustrates to  the student the difficulty of knowledge formulation  particularly to do with actions     A semi automated knowledge acquisition tool in GIPO is  OpMaker  7   this helps  the user to create an operator set simply by providing example solution sequences   The exercise illustrates some of the concepts of Learning from Examples    in ma   chine learning   in particular inductive generalisation     To help explain OpMaker  we use a popular planning application that is supplied  with GIPO   the Lazy Hikers    domain  Two people  hikers  go hiking and driving  around regions of the Lake District  with objects such as tents  cars  regions  and  actions such as putdown  load  getin  getout  drive  unloa
4.  domain model   a full operator set can be induced with the tool  After OpMaker has produced the  set of induced operators  another learning opportunity for the student is to compare  this set with the handcrafted set supplied with GIPO     From this stage in process  the student learns   1  the difficulty in acquiring knowledge about actions    2  how using machine learning techniques one can potentially avoid the need to  hand craft action knowledge    3  the problems and limitations of learning from examples to do with convergence  of generalisations  the need for knowledge refinement and the importance of     good     examples in learning     The construction of operators provides a good opportunity to compare the planning  model with work in formal specification of software  For example  many of our  students used the    B tool    to create software specifications  The pre  and post   condition version of a GIPO operator and an operation specified in B have great  similarities as they both specify deterministic  instantaneous actions in terms of  predicate descriptions     2 2 Domain Validation Tools in GIPO    Continuing the analogy with formal specification of software  once the student has  built up an initial model of the world it is natural to want to validate it  As in formal  specification  this splits into two kinds of validation     Type 1  checking the model for inconsistencies between component parts  Type 2  checking the model   s accuracy with respect to wha
5. 3885   J   loaded tenta car1 keswick  Finding state for prevailing object sue   Finding state for necessary abject transition for tent   loaded tent1 car1 helvelyn   lt  lt  fails to match  gt  gt  loaded tent1    jcar1  keswick                 XS          Ea                      A a                                                           pre     noa   amp  zoomin    amp  zoom out                         ox           Figure 3  The GIPO Stepper    e the reachability analysis tool  each substate that is defined for a sort can be  indexed against the operators that use them either as consumers or producers   The reachability analysis tool reveals to the student substates that cannot be  produced and hence could only ever be used in the initial state of an object   and substates that cannot be consumed and hence form a dead end for the  development of an object  These dead end substates are only useful in the  development of some other object or are of the kind specified only in a goal  condition  The reachability tool can be used in conjunction with OpMaker   it can indicate if the deduced operators do not give an adequate coverage   This is shown by the existence of defined states that are not referenced by  any operators     e the manual stepper  the student can dynamically check a domain is ade   quately specified against a set of problems by using the manual stepper  The  student uses drag and drop to select operators  and pop up menus to instan   tiate them  effectively a
6. The Use of an Integrated Tool to Support  Teaching and Learning in Artificial    Intelligence  T  L  McCluskey and R  M  Simpson  University of Huddersfield Queens Gate Huddersfield  HD13DH  UK  email  r m simpson hud ac uk t l mccluskey  hud ac uk    Abstract  Teaching of knowledge intensive AI is particularly hard as the process  of how knowledge is acquired is difficult to grasp without practical experience  Ac   quiring and using knowledge about actions  events  processes is especially difficult  because of the temporal nature of the subject matter  In this paper we report on a  tool called GIPO that has been used for teaching AI students the areas of knowl   edge acquisition  knowledge engineering  automated planning and machine learn   ing  We give a short walkthrough of some of GIPO   s functions  indicating some  of the learning opportunities offered  We then compare GIPO with other interfaces  used in the computing curriculum  We argue that using a high level integrated tool  such as GIPO for supporting teaching and learning improves the students    learning  experience  and helps integrate the theory and practice in a range of AI and related  subject areas     1 Introduction    The teaching of knowledge intensive AI is difficult both from a theoretical and  practical perspective  because of the peculiar problems to do with acquiring and  crafting knowledge bases  The process of how knowledge is acquired is not easy  for a student to grasp without practical experienc
7. cts  object classes   sorts   predicates  constraints  states  operator schema  and tasks  There are famil   iar point and click  drag and drop functions to help the user build up a new domain  or reuse existing components     2  validation checks for consistency across parts of the developing domain model   Once operator schema have been developed GIPO features a    plan stepper    which  helps the user build up their own solutions to problems in a kind of    mixed initiative     mode     3  resident plan generation engines  and an API for plugging in to third party AI  planners  A plan animator   visualiser displays a planner   s solution to a problem in  terms of the objects which are effected by the plan  This can be stepped through  by the user to see the effects of operators on objects and their properties     A key design goal in building the tool   s interface has been to allow the creation of  a specification in terms of images that describe domain structure at a high level of  generality  The tool takes care of the detail of the syntax of the underlying speci   fication  making it impossible to construct a syntactically ill formed specification   The process of domain model development on which this is based is detailed in the  literature  see references  6  5  for more details     In the next section we give a short walkthrough of some of GIPO   s functions   indicating some of the learning opportunities offered  We then compare GIPO with  other interfaces and tool
8. d  putup  walk  sleepin   tent  They do one    leg    of a long circular track each day  as they get tired and have  to sleep in their tent to recover for the next leg  Their equipment is heavy  so they  have two cars which can be used to carry their tent and themselves to the start end  of a leg  To use OpMaker  the student must first create a    partial    domain model   containing objects  sorts  predicates and state invariants describing the problem  domain  The student then constructs  via a drag and drop process  a solution to a  pre defined task   for instance the following is a solution to the task of doing one  leg of the circular track and being ready for the next leg in the morning     putdown tentl fred keswick    load fred tentl carl keswick   getin sue keswick carl    drive sue carl keswick buttermere   getout sue buttermere carl    unload sue tentl carl buttermere   putup tentl sue buttermere    getin sue buttermere carl    drive sue carl buttermere keswick   getout sue keswick carl    walk sue fred keswick buttermere   sleepintent sue fred tentl buttermere                The student is encouraged to think of each action in terms of a sentence describing  what happens  For example in the last action we think of this as  Sue and fred sleep  in their tent in Buttermere     Each    action    consists of an action identifier followed  by a sequence of objects that the action depends on or changes     From the input of a plan such as the example above  and a partial
9. d integrate aspects of knowledge acquisition  knowledge engineering  automated  planning and machine learning  We show how the tool   s features supports teaching  and the student   s learning experience  and helps integrate the theory and practice  in arange of AI and related subject areas     1 1 History and Overview of GIPO    GIPO   the Graphical Interface for Planning with Objects     12   pronounced GeePo   is the name of a family of experimental tools environments for building planning  domain models  providing help for those involved in knowledge acquisition  do   main modelling  task description  plan generation and plan execution  GIPO was  an output of the PLANFORM project  10   and has been demonstrated in several  major AI conferences  for example at ECP   01 in Toledo  Spain  at ICAPS   03 con   ference in Trento  Italy  and at EKAW    04 in the UK  It was used in the tutorial track  at AI 2003 in December 2003 at Cambridge  and is being entered to the ICAPS   05  knowledge engineering competition at Monterey  USA in June 2005  Two versions  of GIPO   GIPO 1 and GIPO II   are available for downloading from the website   and new versions are currently being produced     GIPO integrates a range of planning tools to help the user explore the domain  encoding  and determine the kind of planner that may be suitable to use with the  domain  In particular it has      http   scom hud ac uk planform gipo    1  graphical tools and visual aids for the input display of obje
10. e of the process  As is the case  with programming and design  it seems that a tools environment that allows the  student to effectively apply the theory in a practical scenario is desirable  From  our experience  a useful tool to help in the teaching of AI within the computing  curriculum should     e connect a range of theory taught during lectures with the application of the  theory during practical classes  it should support a wide range of the curricu   lum  as the student has not the time to learn to use many tools    e integrate AI with other subject areas taught at advanced undergraduate level  in computing    e be as simple as possible to use  having a familiar look and feel  but also be  effective in allowing the student to produce non trivial implementations of  Al    Traditionally AI has been taught within practical sessions by the introduction of  declarative programming languages such as Prolog  Lisp and Haskell  While this  satisfies the first two points  it is not easy to lead students to build or integrate  advanced AI functions from the basis of a programming language  The tutor would  implement AI algorithms to expose their workings  but knowledge intensive issues  such as domain modelling would be harder to illustrate     In this paper we report on a tool called GIPO that has been used for teaching  AI students knowledge engineering for AI Planning for a number of years  We  argue that GIPO meets the criteria set out above and helps students understand  an
11. f  domains  as shown in the figure in the Internal Representation box   To enable  GIPO to be used as a general domain modelling tool we have developed translators  between our internal language and the planning domain language PDDL  11   The  API enables external planning systems to interface to the tools  to provide scope  for testing and fielding alternative planning algorithms to those internal to GIPO     3 Using GIPO in Teaching and Learning    GIPO has been used in the teaching of intermediate and final year undergraduates   in both introductory and advanced AI modules  It offers a wide range of learning  opportunities in AI  through knowledge acquisition  knowledge formulation  vali   dation and maintenance of domain models  inductive learning and automated plan  generation  Although numbers of student groups  typically 15 20  are too small  to make any statistical claims  anecdotally GIPO seems to help students seem to  integrate AI knowledge learned in lectures  and to reach a deeper level of under   standing of    dry    subject matter on say the acquisition of knowledge     10       GIPO Environment       Local Static Global Static Dynamic Validation  Validation Tools Validation Tools Tools  Steppers     Editors ae                                                                                                 Canonical  S  Internal Representation  Planner  l Translators Operator  Plan Viewers  e   3d Tnducti  n  Parsers  OpMaker     Partial orf   Validated  WTA   
12. igure 2 to construct substate definitions   For each object sort  predicates are selected  from the predefined list  will char   acterise a single substate  The process is repeated until all possible substates for  the sort are defined  The possible unifications of variables of the same sort or  between variables belonging to the same path in the sort tree hierarchy can be re   stricted using a visual indication of possibly unifying variables as shown in the  figure  The student selects from a popup menu how an individual variable is to  unify with a target variable and if the decision is that they must be distinct then  a not_equals clause is generated  This strategy for dealing with the unification of  variables is pervasive in the GIPO tool set  The example in the figure in from the  famous    Blocks World    where one possible state of a block is that it is clear and        jState View   Editing Sort   black   fo K  Predicates    Edit State    State Definiti       B  Allsorts on_block block block  on_block B B       5  block on_table block  clear B  Same      5  gripper     cleartblock  Different  gripped block gripper  Optional    busy gripper   Ee                           B   lt  lt  Remove Add  gt  gt   Filter By                 Eirst Reference Only     All Referenced     All Predicates      amp  Refresh Selection      State Variable Bindings     ne B B1              State Variable ID     fl   Change   a  Clear   E Add    amp  Update      Delete                       
13. ing    13    for AI planning  b  PNs emphasise execution simulation rather than just domain  modelling   c     Places    in PNs do not map across naturally to the idea of states as  parameterised predicates     5 Conclusions and Future Work    In this paper we have illustrated the use of the GIPO tool  and shown how it helps  students apply theory  such as in knowledge representation  knowledge acquisition  and formulation  that they have learned during lectures  Its interface and under   lying language uses the object metaphor similar to other tools that students use  in the computing curriculum  Students are able to use it both to gain experience  of a wide range of AI topics  knowledge acquisition  automated planning  learn   ing from examples  and to obtain a deep knowledge of topics in these areas  For  example  a student may learn about algorithms for learning from examples  and  representations for planning operators  but without application the knowledge is  somewhat stale  Using GIPO the student can use the OpMaker tool to induce plan   ning operators  thus both sustaining their knowledge of these areas and integrating  the two together  Additionally  we have argued that GIPO helps students see the  commonalities between AI with other subject areas  helping them to integrate new  knowledge with other parts of the curriculum     We plan to further widen the scope of the GIPO tool  Two new versions are cur   rently undergoing alpha testing and will be available online 
14. l Report CVC TR 98 003 DCS TR 1165  Yale Center for Computa   tional Vision and Control  1998     J  Hoffmann  A Heuristic for Domain Independent Planning and its Use in  an Enforced Hill climbing Algorithm  In Proceedings of the 14th Workshop  on Planning and Configuration   New Results in Planning  Scheduling and  Design  2000     D  Liu and T  L  McCluskey  The OCL Language Manual  Version 1 2  Tech   nical report  Department of Computing and Mathematical Sciences  Univer   sity of Huddersfield   2000     T  L  McCluskey and J  M  Porteous  Engineering and Compiling Planning  Domain Models to Promote Validity and Efficiency  Artificial Intelligence   95 1 65  1997     T  L  McCluskey  N  E  Richardson  and R  M  Simpson  An Interactive  Method for Inducing Operator Descriptions  In The Sixth International Con   ference on Artificial Intelligence Planning Systems  2002     T  L  McCluskey and R  M  Simpson  Knowledge Formulation for AI  Planning  Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Knowledge En   gineering and Knowledge Management  EKAW 2004  Whittlebury Hall   Northamptonshire  UK  2004  Published by Springer in the LNAI series    2004     P  F  Patel Schneider  P  Hayes  and I  Horrocks  OWL web ontology lan   guage semantics and abstract syntax W3C recommendation 10 February  2004  http   www w3 org 2004 OWL   2004     Planform  An open environment for building planners   http   scom hud ac uk planform  1999     15     11  R  M  Simpson  T  L  McCluskey  D  Li
15. lasses     While there were similarities with GIPO in the initial stages of domain  ontology   acquisition  Protege lacked the facilities to execute    the model in any way  This is  not the fault of Protege  but the fact that OWL ontologies are currently capable of  encoding only static knowledge  Students seemed to find GIPO more satisfying as  they could build  view  validate and then execute the model  This ability to involve  the model in some kind of constructive operation  ie plan generation  helped the  student to see what the point of the knowledge acquisition process was     Petri Nets  The Petri Net  PN  has been a well known formalism used to spec   ify and analyse actions in concurrent systems  and other related systems  since the  1960   s  PNs are a popular graphical notation used in teaching as they are relatively  easy to understand  yet have a formal basis  Additionally there are online tools  which can be used effectively in practical sessions  Superficially  there are many  ideas in common between GIPO   s view of AI Planning and Petri Nets  the idea  of a    token    in PNs is very similar to an object instance  PNs have transitions  al   though PN transitions are actually more like instantiated planning operators that  parameterised transitions used as the basis of GIPO   s operators   The main dif   ferences between GIPO and PNs are that  a  PNs are aimed primarily at require   ments modelling and capture for real time systems  rather than domain modell
16. nowledge is structured around ob   ject descriptions  their relationships and the changes they undergo as a result of  the application of operators during plan execution  in contrast to the traditional  literal based approach used in Planning languages such as PDDL  3    The student  identifies the kinds of objects that characterise the domain  and organises them  around distinct collections of objects  which we call sorts  into a hierarchy  Object  instances for each sort are identified  Each object instance in a sort is assumed to  have identical behaviour to any other object in the sort  To assist in this element  of the conceptualisation GIPO provides a visual tree editor  Figure 1   Domain  checking at this initial stage involves enforcing the tree structure and requiring that  node names  for sorts and objects  are unique     The student describes the sorts by identifying predicates that characterise the prop   erties of a typical object of each sort and relationships that hold between objects   We provide an editor to define predicates by a process of drag and drop from the    sort tree previously defined  Sorts are static or dynamic depending on whether or  not objects in that sort are affected by actions during plan execution  ie change  state   Next the student specifies the constraints on dynamic objects sorts  This  is done primarily by characterising each valid state of an object of each dynamic  sort  Typically each member of a sort may be in only one state at a
17. ny time  and that  during plan execution the object goes through transitions which change its state   A substate of an object  called here    substate    to distinguish it from a state of the  world  which is formed from a collection of substates  is the set of all properties  and relations referring to that object that are true     For each sort s  the student uses GIPO to encode state constraints by specifying  all the sensible interpretations of predicates describing s  The substate definitions  derived from this process specify the possible Herbrand interpretations determined  by considering the domain and its constraints  These form the basis of much of the  static validity checks that can be carried out on the completed domain specification   For example  it the sort is door     and predicates are closed  locked and unlocked   then the student would use the tool to state that the only possible interpretations  that can be true are     locked and closed   unlocked and open   unlocked and closed    Any other combinations  eg open and locked  or locked  closed and open  are  excluded  The problem of forming a substate definition of a dynamic sort is more  complex when there are relational predicates referring to that sort and possibly to  other dynamic sorts as well  The collection of all such substates for the object will  be such that at any instance in time exactly one such substate description will be  true of the object     The student uses the editor illustrated in F
18. ough built and aimed  at commercial applications  has been successfully used in teaching for a number  of years in our own curriculum  It alleviates the onerous task of constructing and  discharging proof obligations  The student can understand the need for such rigor  and view the effects of such proof tools with respect to uncovering and identifying  errors  without the need for them to produce hand proofs themselves  As mentioned  above  state based software specification languages have many features in common  with    classical    AI planning domain languages  These shared features are used to  provide useful analogies to the student  in particular     e the concept of a    state       the need to construct operators in terms of pre  and post conditions and state  transitions    the underlying assumptions of default persistence and the    closed world       e the use of invariants to help in validation and model documentation     Of course the objectives of both tools are different   one to rigorously develop soft   ware  the other to develop an application that solves planning problems  In general  the B tool allows the user to input more precise details of a domain  and is more  meticulous at uncovering errors  On the other hand  GIPO   s range of dynamic  tools  the stepper and the use of plan generators  give it an extra dimension that  both stimulates students and allows more scrutiny of the domain model compo   nents  One can simulate operator execution using the B 
19. s used in the computing curriculum   the B tool  Protege  and Petri Nets     2 GIPO Walkthrough  We have found it useful to present the student with two paths through the material     e an online tutorial on how to construct domains  the student is led through a  staged method of domain development    e analysis and execution of a    ready cooked    domain model  this way the stu   dent can at an early stage see the result of domain building   being able to  bind the model with a planner of choice and being able to solve planning  problems       E Sort View  Expert   55     S  car   O carl         car2   9   S  person  8 O fred   L O sue   Piten    O keswick       helvelyn    O fairfield       honister  L    derwent    LS couple    O couplel                   Sort Name       B Add        Delete Selected      Object Name       Add Object                         A Commit   b Verify   ff  Restore     Close            Figure 1  The Sort Editor    We sketch the main steps that the student is led through when using GIPO   s on   line tutorials  This follows a simple knowledge formulation method useful for  building up structured planning domain models  6   The central conception used  to raise the level of abstraction in domain capture is that planning essentially in   volves changing properties and relationships of the objects that inhabit the domain   This appeals to computing students    intuition and is consistent with their studies  in object oriented programming and design  K
20. shortly     e GIPOIII  this version is for domain models that require a much more expres   sive representation language that a traditional     propositional    form  While  GIPO III is based on the same object centric view of the world as GIPO I  and GIPO II  it allows the user to model continuous processes and events  as  well as actions   and allows numeric properties of objects to be specified     e Object Life History and Generic Type interface  this tool forms another  knowledge acquisition input into the tool  in the same way as OpMaker   It  allows the student to enter a diagram recording the transitions of objects  and  automatically create domain operators  It also allows the user to re use pre   stored object patterns that represent typical dynamic objects  For example   Lazy Hiking domain object behaviour can be derived from a combination of  generic objects we call mobile  bistate and portable  see  8  for details      14    References     1    2      3      4      5    sy     6      7      8      9      10     B Core  UK  Ltd  http   www b core com      John H  Gennari  Mark A  Musen  Ray W  Fergerson  William E  Grosso   Monica Crubezy  Henrik Eriksson  Natalya Fridman Noy  and Samson W   Tu  The evolution of Protege  an environment for knowledge based systems  development  Int  J  Hum  Comput  Stud   58  2003     M  Ghallab  A  Howe  C  Knoblock  D  McDermott  A  Ram  M  Veloso   D  Weld  and D  Wilkins  Pddl   the planning domain definition language   Technica
21. t is being modelled     With tools such as GIPO     local    consistency checks on name uniqueness and hi   erarchy definition are automatic when these components are being built  Addi   tionally  Type 1 validation includes checks on global consistency through various    forms of    static    validation  Most effective in GIPO are the checks which verify that  operator definitions do not compromise the substate definitions  Additionally the  student has several opportunities to learn about and carry out dynamic    validation  of both Type 1 and 2  using          GIPO Planning with Objects   hiking    File View Edit Validation Plan Tools Windows        eola        Help  a 8 7  amp  8   s 53 6 te  E a    E wo    Open Save View Print Sorts Predicates States PTrans Tasks Check Algorithm Run FStepper Animator    E Stepper Window  File Action View     amp      amp  4 a      Load Save Preview Print graphics Printtext Close    Task  Editing  Drawing Canvas Operators List    ociTask 10 v load erson Place Tent Can  Initial State       untoad erson Place Tent can  9       getincCar Piace Person   Spk iuc Pasen  aticar2  keswit  walked couplt  outgue keswi  outdred kesw   up enti kesw          put_down erson Place Tent   put_up erson Place Tend  drive erson Car Place Place2   walk_together TentPlace2 Pers        X       TO          za    5 enti    Goal State KAGIPO Information DE   walkeaccoupi     XX  Object s State Property Window     Current State of Object  tent 1      ISL MARO INES 
22. tool  and hence this gives  a primitive plan stepper   but not plan generation as with GIPO     Protege 2000  Protege  2  is a well established knowledge acquisition tool which  aids the user in building up domain models in description logic  As with the B tool     12    it is not designed originally for use in teaching and learning  but it has many fea   tures which make it usable by    non experts     Our final year undergraduate students  are exposed to it ina module entitled        The Semantic Web     Protege is quite a gen   eral tool  here we used it to build up ontologies written in the OWL language  9    Its interface is similar in some ways to GIPO   the usual array of GUI features can  be used to build up object hierarchies and input propositions and class constraints   Protege has many interesting features for the student     e there are online tutorials that slowly build up a student   s knowledge of rele   vant features    e a DL theorem prover such as RACER can be hooked up to check classes  for consistency  ie the definition allows at least one member   Also  class  hierarchies can be re assembled as more properties of the classes are input   This relies on the use of subsumption to check whether one class subsumes  another     e the OWLViz plugin can be used to visualise the class hierarchy of the devel   oping DL theory  We found this feature crucial for students  as after chang   ing a theory and re running subsumption the student can see clearly the new  c
23. ttempting to solve their own planning problems us   ing the model  Each operator is applied in the current state to generate the    consequent state  The student proceeds in this manner to verify that the do   main and operator definitions do support the known plans for given problems  within the domain  The stepper operates as a manual forward planner  with  results of each object transition caused by an operator shown graphically  see  Figure 3      e running planning engines  the student can  of course  execute one of the  supplied planners within GIPO on specified tasks  Such is the intractable  nature of planning problems that his has to be carefully controlled by the  tutor and GIPO  Depending on the planner   task combination chosen  the  solution may not be found for a good period of time  GIPO has its own  planning engines  but third party planners are easy to integrate  we often  use the FF  4  planer  which was a past winner of the International Planning  Competition   After a planner has returned a solution  the student can step  through the solution using GIPO   s animator tool  This takes the results of  a planner and produces a graphical representation of the object transitions  using the same layout as the stepper     We have outlined the main components of GIPO above   more details can be found  in the AI Planning literature e g  7   The overall architecture of the GIPO is shown  in Figure 4  At the heart of GIPO is an object centred internal representation o
24. u  and D  E  Kitchin  Knowledge  Representation in Planning  A PDDL to OCL  Translation  In Proceedings of  the 12th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems   2000      12  R  M  Simpson  T  L  McCluskey  W  Zhao  R  S  Aylett  and C  Doniat  GIPO   An Integrated Graphical Tool to support Knowledge Engineering in AI Plan   ning  In Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Planning  2001     16    
    
Download Pdf Manuals
 
 
    
Related Search
    
Related Contents
VGN-AW190NAB    2015 Front Cover - Add On Accessories  Curtis PLED4616A 46" Full HD Black LED TV  Jack LaLanne's PJEB Use and Care Manual  Avaya 1050 Installation Guide  downloaden    Copyright © All rights reserved. 
   Failed to retrieve file