Planning with preferences has been employed extensively to quickly generate high-quality plans. However, it may be difficult for the human expert to supply this information without knowledge of the reasoning employed by the planner and the distribution of planning problems. We consider the problem of actively eliciting preferences from a human expert during the planning process. Specifically, we study this problem in the context of the Hierarchical Task Network (HTN) planning framework as it allows easy interaction with the human. Our experimental results on several diverse planning domains show that the preferences gathered using the proposed approach improve the quality and speed of the planner, while reducing the burden on the human expert.
The Mars Exploration Rover mission is one of NASA's most ambitious science missions to date. Launched in the summer of 2003, each rover carries instruments for conducting remote and in site observations to elucidate the planet's past climate, water activity, and habitability. Science is MER's primary driver, so making best use of the scientific instruments, within the available resources, is a crucial aspect of the mission. To address this criticality, the MER project team selected MAPGEN (mixed initiative activity plan generator) as an activity-planning tool. MAPGEN combines two existing systems, each with a strong heritage: the APGEN activity-planning tool from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Europa planning and scheduling system from NASA Ames Research Center. We discuss the issues arising from combining these tools in this mission's context. MAPGEN is the first AI-based system to control a space platform on another planet's surface. We have been examining mixed-initiative planning systems in the context of command and control or logistical overview situations. In such environments, the human and the computer must work together in a very tightly coupled way to solve problems that neither alone could manage. In this paper, we describe our implementation of a prototype version of such a system, TRAINS-95, which helps a manager solve routing problems in a simple transportation domain. Interestingly perhaps, traditional planning technology does not play a major role in the system, and in fact it is difficult to see how such components might fit into a mixed-initiative system. We describe some of these issues, and present our agenda for future research into mixed-initiative plan reasoning. At this writing, the TRAINS-95 system has been used by more than 100 people to solve simple problems at various conferences and workshops, and in our experiments. 