Marianela Morales

AI
h-index12
5papers
5citations
Novelty53%
AI Score43

5 Papers

AIAug 20, 2024
On Learning Action Costs from Input Plans

Marianela Morales, Alberto Pozanco, Giuseppe Canonaco et al.

Most of the work on learning action models focus on learning the actions' dynamics from input plans. This allows us to specify the valid plans of a planning task. However, very little work focuses on learning action costs, which in turn allows us to rank the different plans. In this paper we introduce a new problem: that of learning the costs of a set of actions such that a set of input plans are optimal under the resulting planning model. To solve this problem we present $LACFIP^k$, an algorithm to learn action's costs from unlabeled input plans. We provide theoretical and empirical results showing how $LACFIP^k$ can successfully solve this task.

AIJun 12, 2025
GenPlanX. Generation of Plans and Execution

Daniel Borrajo, Giuseppe Canonaco, Tomás de la Rosa et al.

Classical AI Planning techniques generate sequences of actions for complex tasks. However, they lack the ability to understand planning tasks when provided using natural language. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has introduced novel capabilities in human-computer interaction. In the context of planning tasks, LLMs have shown to be particularly good in interpreting human intents among other uses. This paper introduces GenPlanX that integrates LLMs for natural language-based description of planning tasks, with a classical AI planning engine, alongside an execution and monitoring framework. We demonstrate the efficacy of GenPlanX in assisting users with office-related tasks, highlighting its potential to streamline workflows and enhance productivity through seamless human-AI collaboration.

25.2AIApr 8
Planning Task Shielding: Detecting and Repairing Flaws in Planning Tasks through Turning them Unsolvable

Alberto Pozanco, Marianela Morales, Pietro Totis et al.

Most research in planning focuses on generating a plan to achieve a desired set of goals. However, a goal specification can also be used to encode a property that should never hold, allowing a planner to identify a trace that would reach a flawed state. In such cases, the objective may shift to modifying the planning task to ensure that the flawed state is never reached-in other words, to make the planning task unsolvable. In this paper we introduce planning task shielding: the problem of detecting and repairing flaws in planning tasks. We propose $allmin$, an optimal algorithm that solves these tasks by minimally modifying the original actions to render the planning task unsolvable. We empirically evaluate the performance of $allmin$ in shielding planning tasks of increasing size, showing how it can effectively shield the system by turning the planning task unsolvable.

AIAug 21, 2025
Planning with Minimal Disruption

Alberto Pozanco, Marianela Morales, Daniel Borrajo et al.

In many planning applications, we might be interested in finding plans that minimally modify the initial state to achieve the goals. We refer to this concept as plan disruption. In this paper, we formally introduce it, and define various planning-based compilations that aim to jointly optimize both the sum of action costs and plan disruption. Experimental results in different benchmarks show that the reformulated task can be effectively solved in practice to generate plans that balance both objectives.

AIMar 12, 2025
A Planning Compilation to Reason about Goal Achievement at Planning Time

Alberto Pozanco, Marianela Morales, Daniel Borrajo et al.

Identifying the specific actions that achieve goals when solving a planning task might be beneficial for various planning applications. Traditionally, this identification occurs post-search, as some actions may temporarily achieve goals that are later undone and re-achieved by other actions. In this paper, we propose a compilation that extends the original planning task with commit actions that enforce the persistence of specific goals once achieved, allowing planners to identify permanent goal achievement during planning. Experimental results indicate that solving the reformulated tasks does not incur on any additional overhead both when performing optimal and suboptimal planning, while providing useful information for some downstream tasks.