Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.

Sertac Karapinar

dblp:117/4871 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 75% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 25%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › plan execution
failure recovery
0.112012
Failure Handling In a Planning Framework · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › knowledge-based systems › rule-based systems
forward chaining
0.112012
Failure Handling In a Planning Framework · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
plan execution
0.112012
Failure Handling In a Planning Framework · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
temporal planning
0.112012
Failure Handling In a Planning Framework · AAAI 2012

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

TLPlan · 0.1PROBCOG · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2012 Failure Handling In a Planning Framework
abstract
When an agent plans a sequence of actions, some unexpected events may occur during the execution of these actions. These unexpected events may prevent the agent to replan and achieve its goal. In this work, our purpose is to recover from plan execution failures by reasoning the causes of these faulties. We combine the TLPlan forward chaining temporal planner with the PROBCOG reasoning tool in order to handle failures. It is also quite important to decide whether the failure we are dealing with is permanent. We propose that inferring some properties of the failure source helps us handle failures and determine the failure types.
Sertac Karapinar, Sanem Sariel
AAAI1