Search for: All records

Flexibility is a useful and common metric for measuring the amount of slack in a Simple Temporal Network (STN) solution space. We extend this concept to specific schedules within an STN’s solution space, developing a related notion of durability that captures an individual schedule’s ability to withstand disturbances and still remain valid. We identify practical sources of scheduling disturbances that motivate the need for durable schedules, and create a geometricallyinspired empirical model that enables testing a given schedule’s ability to withstand these disturbances. We develop a number of durability metrics and use these to characterize and compute specific schedules that we expect to have high durability. Using our model of disturbances, we show that our durability metrics strongly predict a schedule’s resilience to practical scheduling disturbances. We also demonstrate that the schedules we identify as having high durability are up to three times more resilient to disturbances than an arbitrarily chosen schedule is. 

Controllability for Simple Temporal Networks with Uncertainty (STNUs) has thus far been limited to three levels: strong, dynamic, and weak. Because of this, there is currently no systematic way for an agent to assess just how far from being controllable an uncontrollable STNU is. We use a new geometric interpretation of STNUs to introduce the degrees of strong and dynamic controllability – continuous metrics that measure how far a network is from being controllable. We utilize these metrics to approximate the probabilities that an STNU can be dispatched successfully offline and online respectively. We introduce new methods for predicting the degrees of strong and dynamic controllability for uncontrollable networks. In addition, we show empirically that both metrics are good predictors of the actual dispatch success rate. 

Generating and executing temporal plans is difficult in uncertain environments. The current state-of-the-art algorithm for probabilistic temporal networks maintains a high success rate by rescheduling frequently as uncertain events are resolved, but this approach involves substantial resource overhead due to computing and communicating new schedules between agents. Aggressive rescheduling could thus reduce overall mission duration or success in situations where agents have limited energy or computing power, and may not be feasible when communication is limited. In this paper, we propose new approaches for heuristically deciding when rescheduling is most efficacious. We propose two compatible approaches, Allowable Risk and Sufficient Change, that can be employed in combination to compromise between the computation rate, the communication rate, and success rate for new schedules. We show empirically that both approaches allow us to gracefully trade success rate for lower computation and/or communication as compared to the state-of-the-art dynamic scheduling algorithm.