MAXSAT Heuristics for Cost Optimal Planning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cost of an optimal delete relaxed plan, known as h+, is a powerful admissible heuristic but is in general intractable to compute. In this paper we examine the problem of computing h+ by encoding it as a MAXSAT problem. We develop a new encoding that utilizes constraint generation to support the computation of a sequence of increasing lower bounds on h+. We show a close connection between the computations performed by a recent approach for solving MAXSAT and a hitting set approach recently proposed for computing h+. Using this connection we observe that our MAXSAT computation can be initialized with a set of landmarks computed by LM-cut. By judicious use of MAXSAT solving along with a technique of lazy heuristic evaluation we obtain speedups for finding optimal plans over LM-cut on a number of domains. Our approach enables the exploitation of continued progress in MAXSAT solving, and also makes it possible to consider computing or approximating heuristics that are even more informed that h+ by, for example, adding some information about deletes back into the encoding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it