We present an approach to learning cooperative behavior of agents. Our ap-proach is based on classifying situations with the help of the nearest-neighborrule. In this context, learning amounts to evolving a set of good prototypical sit-uations. With each prototypical situation an action is associated that should beexecuted in that situation. A set of prototypical situation/action pairs togetherwith the nearest-neighbor rule represent the behavior of an agent.We demonstrate the utility of our approach in the light of variants of thewell-known pursuit game. To this end, we present a classification of variantsof the pursuit game, and we report on the results of our approach obtained forvariants regarding several aspects of the classification. A first implementationof our approach that utilizes a genetic algorithm to conduct the search for a setof suitable prototypical situation/action pairs was able to handle many differentvariants.

The common wisdom that goal orderings can be used to improve planning performance is nearly as old as planning itself. During the last decades of research several approaches emerged that computed goal orderings for different planning paradigms, mostly in the area of state-space planning. For partial-order, plan-space planners goal orderings have not been investigated in much detail. Mechanisms developed for statespace planning are not directly applicable because partial-order planners do not have a current (world) state. Further, it is not completely clear how plan-space planners should make use of goal orderings. This paper describes an approach to extract goal orderings to be used by the plan-space planner CAPlan. The extraction of goal orderings is based on the analysis of an extended version of operator graphs which previously have been found useful for the analysis of interactions and recursion of plan-space planners.

Freivalds, Karpinski and Smith [8] explored a special type of learning in the limit: identification of an unknown concept (function) by eliminating (erasing) all but one possible hypothesis (this type of learning is called co-learning). The motivation behind learning by erasing lies in the process of human and automated computer learning: often we can discard incorrect solutions much easier than to come up with the correct one. In Gödel numberings any learnable family can be learned by an erasing strategy. In this paper we concentrate on co-learning minimal programs. We show that co-learning of minimal programs, as originally defined is significantly weaker than learning minimal programs in Gödel numberings. In order to enhance the learning power

This report presents the properties of a specification of the domain of process planning for rotary symmetrical workpieces. The specification results from a model for problem solving in this domain that involves different reasoners, one of which is an AI planner that achieves goals corresponding to machining workpieces by considering certain operational restrictions of the domain. When planning with SNLP (McAllester and Rosenblitt, 1991), we will show that the resulting plans have the property of minimizing the use of certain key operations. Further, we will show that, for elastic protected plans (Kambhampati et al., 1996) such as the ones produced by SNLP, the goals corresponding to machining parts of a workpiece are OE-constrained trivial serializable, a special form of trivial serializability (Barrett and Weld, 1994). However, we will show that planning with SNLP in this domain can be very difficult: elastic protected plans for machining parts of a workpiece are nonmergeable. Finally, we will show that, for sufix, prefix or sufix and prefix plans such as the ones produced by state-space planners, it is not possible to have both properties, being OEconstrained trivial serializable and minimizing the use of the key operations, at the same time.

Ein fundamentaler Schritt des fallbasierten Schliessens (FBS) ist das Retrieval einer handhabbaren Menge von Fällen aus einer Fallbasis, die als Grundlage für die weiteren Schritte des FBS, wie die Modifikation und Übertragung bekannter Lösungen auf einen gegebenen Problemfall, dienen.

The feature interaction problem in telecommunications systems increasingly obstructsthe evolution of such systems. We develop formal detection criteria which render anecessary (but less than sufficient) condition for feature interactions. It can be checkedmechanically and points out all potentially critical spots. These have to be analyzedmanually. The resulting resolution decisions are incorporated formally. Some prototypetool support is already available. A prerequisite for formal criteria is a formal definitionof the problem. Since the notions of feature and feature interaction are often used in arather fuzzy way, we attempt a formal definition first and discuss which aspects can beincluded in a formalization (and therefore in a detection method). This paper describeson-going work.

The feature interaction problem in Intelligent Networks obstructs more and morethe rapid introduction of new features. Detecting such feature interactions turns out to be a big problem. The size of the systems and the sheer computational com-plexity prevents the system developer from checking manually any feature against any other feature. We give an overview on current (verification) approaches and categorize them into property-oriented and automata-theoretic approaches. A comparisonturns out that each approach complements the other in a certain sense. We proposeto apply both approaches together in order to solve the feature interaction problem.

A large set of criteria to evaluate formal methods for reactive systems is presented. To make this set more comprehensible, it is structured according to a Concept-Model of formal methods. It is made clear that it is necessary to make the catalogue more specific before applying it. Some of the steps needed to do so are explained. As an example the catalogue is applied within the context of the application domain building automation systems to three different formal methods: SDL, statecharts, and a temporallogic.

Im Bereich der Expertensysteme ist das Problemlösen auf der Basis von bekannten Fallbeispielen ein derzeit sehr aktuelles Thema. Auch für Diagnoseaufgaben gewinnt der fallbasierte Ansatz immer mehr an Bedeutung. In diesem Papier soll der im Rahmen des Moltke -Projektes1 an der Universität Kaiserslautern entwickelte fallbasierte Problemlöser Patdex/22 vorgestellt werden. Ein erster Prototyp, Patdex/1, wurde bereits 1988 entwickelt.

Das System ART (ASF RRL Translation) stellt im wesentlichen eine Umgebung dar,in welcher die Modularisierbarkeit von Beweisen (Induktionsbeweisen über Gleichungs-spezifikationen) untersucht werden kann. Es wurde die bereits bestehende Spezifikati-onsprache ASF (siehe [BeHeKl89]), in welcher modularisierte Spezifikationen möglichsind, so erweitert, daß zusätzlich auch Beweisaufgaben spezifiziert werden können. Imfolgenden wird diese erweiterte Spezifikationsprache auch ASF genannt. Als Bewei-ser für die Beweisaufgaben einer Spezifikation wurde RRL (siehe [KaZh89]) gewählt.RRL kann sowohl Kommandos aus einem File abarbeiten, wie auch Sitzungsprotokolleanfertigen, mit deren Hilfe sich die Beweisverläufe und Benutzereingaben der entspre-chenden RRL-Sitzung rekonstruieren lassen. In ART kann nun eine ASF-Spezifikation,die Beweisaufgaben umfassen kann, in ein File übersetzt werden, welches von RRLabgearbeitet werden kann. Dies wird im folgenden kurz mit 'Übersetzung von ASF nach RRL' bezeichnet. Bei der Abarbeitung eines solchen Files wird von RRL ein Sit-zungsprotokoll angelegt. ART kann dieses Sitzungsprotokoll dazu heranziehen, neueErgebnisse, wie etwa den erfolgreichen Beweis einer Beweisaufgabe, zu ermitteln, umdiese Ergebnisse der ursprüngliche Spezifikation hinzuzufügen. Dies wird im folgendenkurz mit 'Rückübersetzung von RRL nach ASF' bezeichnet. Im Kern besteht ART alsoaus einer Komponente zur Übersetzung von ASF nach RRL und aus einer Komponentezur Rückübersetzung von RRL nach ASF.