Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ava Clifton
dblp:355/6181
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
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 · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
classical planning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Property Directed Reachability for Planning Revisited · KR 2023 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › multi-agent planning
distributed planning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Property Directed Reachability for Planning Revisited · KR 2023 |
Automated reasoning and model checking › satisfiability
SAT-based verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Property Directed Reachability for Planning Revisited · KR 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
portfolio planning · 1.3incremental SAT solving · 1.3distributed search · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Property Directed Reachability for Planning RevisitedabstractProperty Directed Reachability (PDR) is a relatively new SAT-based search paradigm for classical AI planning. Compared to earlier SAT-based paradigms, PDR proceeds without unrolling the system transition function, and therefore without having the underlying procedure reason about potentially computationally expensive multi-step formulae. By maintaining a queue of obligations - i.e., a state at a timestep - and knowledge about what is possible at each planning step, PDR iteratively evaluates whether an obligation can be progressed by one step towards the goal. We develop and evaluate two new distributed PDR algorithms for planning, and additionally implement serial and portfolio PDR algorithms for planning. We are the first to consider distributed PDR for planning and the first to consider PDR based on incremental SAT solving in that setting. Our first new algorithm, PS-PDR, evaluates many obligations independently in parallel using a pool of incremental SAT workers. PS-PDR is unique amongst distributed PDR algorithms in centrally maintaining a single queue of obligations, enabling an efficient focused search compared to a PDR portfolio. Our second new algorithm, PD-PDR, sequences subproblems according to the compositional structure of the concrete problem at hand. Subproblems are solved independently in parallel, with a concrete plan obtained by combining subproblem plans. Our experimental evaluation exhibits strong runtime gains for both new algorithms in both satisfiable and unsatisfiable planning benchmarks. Ava Clifton, Charles Gretton |
KR | 1 |