patrick/plasp
Archived
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 12 Releases 8 Activity

Investigate performance differences between Madagascar and our planner #38

New Issue
Closed
opened 2017-12-08 17:30:00 +01:00 by patrick · 2 comments
patrick commented 2017-12-08 17:30:00 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

With some domains, we got drastically different results between Madagascar and our planner (generate-and-check configuration).

These domains include:

  • ipc-2000/blocks-strips-typed (where we are much better)
  • ipc-2011/elevator-sequential-satisficing (where Madagascar is much better)
  • ipc-2011/parking-sequential-satisficing (where Madagascar is much better)
  • ipc-2011/tidybot-sequential-satisficing (where Madagascar is much better)

The following metrics could be of interest in order to investigate this:

  • grounding vs. solving times with our planner
  • the number of strongly connected components obtained by Madagascar’s preprocessing
  • the plan length after which the planners terminated (successfully or not)
With some domains, we got drastically different results between Madagascar and our planner (generate-and-check configuration). These domains include: - `ipc-2000/blocks-strips-typed` (where we are much better) - `ipc-2011/elevator-sequential-satisficing` (where Madagascar is much better) - `ipc-2011/parking-sequential-satisficing` (where Madagascar is much better) - `ipc-2011/tidybot-sequential-satisficing` (where Madagascar is much better) The following metrics could be of interest in order to investigate this: - grounding vs. solving times with our planner - the number of strongly connected components obtained by Madagascar’s preprocessing - the plan length after which the planners terminated (successfully or not)
patrick added this to the Extended Paper for TPLP Journal milestone 2017-12-08 17:30:00 +01:00
patrick self-assigned this 2017-12-08 17:30:00 +01:00
patrick added the task label 2017-12-08 17:30:00 +01:00
patrick commented 2017-12-08 18:33:02 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

The number of strongly connected components doesn’t seem to be a good indicator. We were better in ipc-2000/blocks-strips-typed, where the maximum strongly connected component size was 1. However, this was also 1 for ipc-2011/elevator-sequential-satisficing, where we were much worse, and for ipc-2011/parking-sequential-satisficing and ipc-2011/tidybot-sequential-satisficing (where we also were much worse), the size of the largest strongly connected components ranged between 20 and 60.

The number of strongly connected components doesn’t seem to be a good indicator. We were better in `ipc-2000/blocks-strips-typed`, where the maximum strongly connected component size was 1. However, this was also 1 for `ipc-2011/elevator-sequential-satisficing`, where we were much worse, and for `ipc-2011/parking-sequential-satisficing` and `ipc-2011/tidybot-sequential-satisficing` (where we also were much worse), the size of the largest strongly connected components ranged between 20 and 60.
patrick commented 2017-12-13 00:32:40 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Javier found out that this is likely due to the differences between exists-step and for-all-step planning.

Javier found out that this is likely due to the differences between exists-step and for-all-step planning.
This repo is archived. You cannot comment on issues.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
aesthetic
benchmarks
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
help wanted
invalid
question
suggestion
task
wontfix
No labels task
Milestone
No items
No Milestone Extended Paper for TPLP Journal
Assignees
Clear assignees
patrick (Patrick Lühne)
No Assignees patrick
1 Participants
Due Date
-
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: patrick/plasp#38