Optimally Relaxing Partial-Order Plans with MaxSAT
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
Partial-order plans (POPs) are attractive because of their least commitment nature, providing enhanced plan flexibility at execution time relative to sequential plans. Despite the appeal of POPs, most of the recent research on automated plan generation has focused on sequential plans. In this paper we examine the task of POP generation by relaxing or modifying the action orderings of a plan to optimize for plan criteria that promotes flexibility in the POP. Our approach relies on a novel partial weighted MaxSAT encoding of a plan that supports the minimization of deordering or reordering of actions. We further extend the classical least commitment criterion for a POP to consider the number of actions in a solution, and provide an encoding to achieve least commitment plans with respect to this criterion. We compare the effectiveness of our approach to a previous approach for POP generation via sequential-plan relaxation. Our results show that while the previous approach is proficient at heuristically finding the optimal deordering of a plan, our approach gains greater flexibility with the optimal reordering.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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