Abstract We suggest to express policies for contingent planning by knowledge-based programs (KBPs). KBPs, introduced by Fagin et al. (1995) [32] , are high-level protocols describing the actions that the agent should perform as a function of their current knowledge: branching conditions are epistemic formulas that are interpretable by the agent. The main aim of our paper is to show that KBPs can be seen as a succinct language for expressing policies in single-agent contingent planning. KBP are conceptually very close to languages used for expressing policies in the partially observable planning literature: like them, they have conditional and looping structures, with actions as atomic programs and Boolean formulas on beliefs for choosing the execution path. Now, the specificity of KBPs is that branching conditions refer to the belief state and not to the observations. Because of their structural proximity, KBPs and standard languages for representing policies have the same power of expressivity: every standard policy can be expressed as a KBP, and every KBP can be “unfolded” into a standard policy. However, KBPs are more succinct, more readable, and more explainable than standard policies. On the other hand, they require more online computation time, but we show that this is an unavoidable tradeoff. We study knowledge-based programs along four criteria: expressivity, succinctness, complexity of online execution, and complexity of verification.

中文翻译：

---

基于知识的程序作为部分可观察领域的简洁策略

摘要 我们建议通过基于知识的程序 (KBP) 来表达应急计划的政策。Fagin 等人介绍的 KBP。(1995) [32] 是高级协议，描述了代理应根据其当前知识执行的操作：分支条件是代理可解释的认知公式。我们论文的主要目的是表明 KBP 可以被视为一种简洁的语言，用于在单代理应急计划中表达政策。KBP 在概念上非常接近用于在部分可观察的规划文献中表达策略的语言：像它们一样，它们具有条件和循环结构，具有作为原子程序的动作和关于选择执行路径的信念的布尔公式。现在，KBP 的特殊性在于分支条件是指信念状态而不是观察结果。由于它们的结构接近，用于表示策略的 KBP 和标准语言具有相同的表达能力：每个标准策略都可以表示为 KBP，并且每个 KBP 都可以“展开”为标准策略。但是，与标准策略相比，KBP 更简洁、更易读且更易于解释。另一方面，它们需要更多的在线计算时间，但我们表明这是不可避免的权衡。我们按照四个标准研究基于知识的程序：表达性、简洁性、在线执行的复杂性和验证的复杂性。每个标准策略都可以表示为一个 KBP，每个 KBP 都可以“展开”为一个标准策略。但是，与标准策略相比，KBP 更简洁、更易读且更易于解释。另一方面，它们需要更多的在线计算时间，但我们表明这是不可避免的权衡。我们按照四个标准研究基于知识的程序：表达性、简洁性、在线执行的复杂性和验证的复杂性。每个标准策略都可以表示为一个 KBP，每个 KBP 都可以“展开”为一个标准策略。但是，与标准策略相比，KBP 更简洁、更易读且更易于解释。另一方面，它们需要更多的在线计算时间，但我们表明这是不可避免的权衡。我们按照四个标准研究基于知识的程序：表达性、简洁性、在线执行的复杂性和验证的复杂性。