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.
? Tutorial for this page

Ari K. Jónsson

dblp:30/4049 · also Ari Kristinn Jónsson · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2011
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 3 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Theory of computation · 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
3 papers
Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 63% Legged, aerial and field robots · 37%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-robot interaction · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › planning
activity planning
0.112005
Mixed-Initiative Activity Planning for Mars Rovers · IJCAI 2005
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots
space robotics
0.112005
Mixed-Initiative Activity Planning for Mars Rovers · IJCAI 2005
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
scheduling
0.011999
Cyclic Scheduling · IJCAI 1999
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
procedural reasoning
0.011996
Procedural Reasoning in Constraint Satisfaction · KR 1996

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

mixed-initiative planning · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2011 Planning solar array operations on the international space station
abstract
Flight controllers manage the orientation and modes of eight large solar arrays that power the International Space Station (ISS). The task requires generating plans that balance complex constraints and preferences. These considerations include context-dependent constraints on viable solar array configurations, temporal limits on transitions between configurations, and preferences on which considerations have priority. The Solar Array Constraint Engine (SACE) treats this operations planning problem as a sequence of tractable constrained optimization problems. SACE uses constraint management and automated planning capabilities to reason about the constraints, to find optimal array configurations subject to these constraints and solution preferences, and to automatically generate solar array operations plans. SACE further provides flight controllers with real-time situational awareness and what-if analysis capabilities. SACE is built on the Extensible Universal Remote Operations Planning Architecture (EUROPA) model-based planning system. EUROPA facilitated SACE development by providing model-based planning, built-in constraint reasoning capability, and extensibility. This article formulates the planning problem, explains how EUROPA solves the problem, and provides performance statistics from several planning scenarios. SACE reduces a highly manual process that takes weeks to an automated process that takes tens of minutes.
Sudhakar Y. Reddy, Jeremy Frank, Michael Iatauro, Matthew E. Boyce, Elif Kürklü, Mitchell Ai-Chang, Ari K. Jónsson
ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.7
2005 Mixed-Initiative Activity Planning for Mars Rovers
John L. Bresina, Ari K. Jónsson, Paul H. Morris, Kanna Rajan
IJCAI2
2005 Challenges in verification and validation of autonomous systems for space exploration
abstract
Space exploration applications offer a unique opportunity for the development and deployment of autonomous systems, due to limited communications, large distances, and great expense of direct operation. At the same time, the risk and cost of space missions leads to reluctance to taking on new, complex and difficult-to-understand technology. A key issue in addressing these concerns is the validation of autonomous systems. In recent years, higher-level autonomous systems have been applied in space applications. In this presentation, we highlight those autonomous systems, and discuss issues in validating these systems. We then look to future demands on validating autonomous systems for space, identify promising technologies and open issues.
Guillaume Brat, Ari K. Jónsson
IJCNN2
2000 A Framework for Dynamic Constraint Reasoning using Procedural Constraints
Ari K. Jónsson, Jeremy Frank
ECAI1
1999 Cyclic Scheduling
Denise Draper, Ari K. Jónsson, Dave Clements, David Joslin 0002
IJCAI2
1996 Procedural Reasoning in Constraint Satisfaction
Ari K. Jónsson, Matthew L. Ginsberg
KR1