No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Declarative modeling of symbolic continous processes in a robot simulation system*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 March 2009
Summary
The production system has been used extensively in Artificial Intelligence systems due, possibly, to a lack of a prior procedural orientation towards the knowledge embedded within it. As a result, this paradigm is especially useful in modeling domains in which a strong procedural correlation of data would not naturally appear. The production system is therefore an appropriate tool for designing models of systems of independent processes whose interactions can be defined in terms of system state.
We are interested in modeling continuous, concurrent processes for simulating robot activities, and present a description of a system which is capable of representing such processes as symbolic expressions within a production system database. This system implements a world model which acts as a continuous function of time, and a set of rules written in a language capable of specifying time-dependent properties of the model. In addition, rules may specify new rules, thus permitting processes to be mapped out over time as sequences of events.
The methodology presented in this paper is an attempt to utilize the power of symbolic programming in a design for world modeling, and a characterization of the requirements for applying such systems to problem domains which contain a continuous parameter, such as time. We believe that the technique of embedding time used here is appropriate for expressing the dynamic evolution of these models.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984
References
1Abelson, H. and Sussman, G.J., Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1984).Google Scholar
2Davis, R. and King, J., “An overview of production systems” Machine Intelligence 8 300–322 (1977).Google Scholar
3Zisman, M., “Use of production systems for modeling asynchronous, concurrent processes”, In: Pattern Directed Inference Systems (Waterman, D.A. and Hayes-Roth, F., eds.) (Academic Press, N.Y. 1977) 53–68.Google Scholar
4Waterman, D., “Adaptive production systems” Complex Information Processing Working Paper No. 285, Psychology Dept., Carnegie-Mellon University (1974).Google Scholar
6Hendrix, G.G., “Modeling simultaneous actions and continuous processes” Artificial Intelligence 4, 145–180 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Lowrance, J. and Friedman, D.P., “Hendrix's model for simultaneous actions and continuous processes: an introduction and implementation” Int J. Man-Machine Studies, vol. 9, 51 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Salter, R.M., Brennan, T. and Friedman, D.P., “CONCUR: A language for continuous, concurrent processes” Computer Languages 5, 163–189 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Foderaro, J., Sklower, K.L. and Layer, K., The FRANZ LISP Manual University of California (1983).Google Scholar
10Friedman, D.P., Haynes, C.T., Kohlbecker, E. and Wand, M., “Scheme 84 Reference Manual”, Technical Report No. 153, Indiana University Computer Science Department, (1984).Google Scholar
11Fikes, R.E. and Nilsson, N. J., “STRIPS: a new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving”. Artificial Intelligence 2, 189–208 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Charniak, E., Riesbeck, C. and McDermott, D., Artificial Intelligence Programming L. Erlbaum Assoc. (1980).Google Scholar
13Salter, R.M., “Planning in a continuous domain—an introduction” Robotica, vol. 1, 85–93 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Waldinger, R., “Achieving several goals simultaneously” Machine Intelligence 8, 94–136 (1977).Google Scholar