Penguins Can Make Cake
Penguins Can Make Cake
复制标题
企鹅会做蛋糕
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1989
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
David Chapman
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
David Chapman
这篇文章是对马修·金斯伯格题为《普遍计划：一个（几乎）普遍的坏主意》的文章的回复。金斯伯格认为，由于计算的复杂性，单一计划是不可行的，并得出结论，经典计划或类似的计划是活动的适当基础。他还认为，包括Pengi在内的其他一些系统几乎是普遍的计划，受到同样的批评。我认为这个扩展是不正确的。我说明了我的推理与描述块头，一个类似Pengi的系统，有效地解决了水果蛋糕的问题，金斯伯格认为是不可行的通用计划。Blockhead的结构阐明了规划，通用计划和Pengi之间的关系。我的结论是，规划和通用计划是计算棘手的，因为他们的代表性假设。
This article is a reply to Matthew Ginsberg's article entitled "Universal Planning: An (Almost) Universally Bad Idea." Ginsberg argues that uni-versal plans are infeasible for reasons of compu-tational complexity and concludes that classical planning -- or something like it -- is the appropri-ate basis for activity. He also argues that a number of other systems, including Pengi, are approximately universal plans and subject to the same criticisms. I think that this extension is incorrect. I illustrate my reasoning with a description of Blockhead, a Pengi-like system that efficiently solves the fruitcake problem which Ginsberg argues is infeasible for universal plans. The structure of Blockhead elucidates the relationship between planning, universal plans, and Pengi. I conclude that planning and universal plans are computationally intractable because of the representational assumptions they make.