The deterministic part of the seventh International Planning Competition
Open accessAbstract
The International Planning Competition is organized in the context of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS) and it is considered a reference source for the planning and scheduling community. The competition is typically organized every two years and deals with relevant issues for the community such as the definition of evaluation standards, the publication of benchmarks and the collection and dissemination of data about state-of-the-art planners. This paper focuses on the deterministic part, the longest-running part of the International Planning Competition. The paper describes its format, the participants, the selection of benchmarks and the generated results accompanied with analysis from different perspectives. The paper also examines the results of a brand new track created to explore the potential of planners that exploit the power of multi-core processors. Overall, the results of the competition indicate significant progress with respect to previous competitions, but they also reveal that some issues remain open and need further research, such as the coverage of temporal planners when concurrency is required and the performance in the multi-core track. As a novelty, all the data and the software generated for running the competition have been made publicly available allowing researchers to reproduce the competition and to carry out different analysis of the results.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The equivalence algorithm is efficient for three domains: Blocks World, Gripper, and a slightly simplified Floor Tile.
“We show how to make this algorithm efficient for three domains: Blocks World, Gripper, and a slightly simplified Floor Tile (McDermott, 2000;Linares López et al., 2015).”
From Planetarium: A Rigorous Benchmark for Translating Text to Structured Planning Languages (2025) · cites this paper as Linares López et al., 2015
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Graph-Based Algorithms for Boolean Function Manipulation
Bryant (1986) · IEEE Transactions on Computers · doi:10.1109/tc.1986.1676819 · Cited by 8,941 · see citing works
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771 · see citing works
The FF Planning System: Fast Plan Generation Through Heuristic Search
Hoffmann, J., & Nebel, B. (2001) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.855 · Cited by 1,840 · see citing works
PDDL2.1: An Extension to PDDL for Expressing Temporal Planning Domains
Fox, M., & Long, D. (2003) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1129 · Cited by 1,741 · see citing works
Scientific method: Statistical errors
Nuzzo, R. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/506150a · Cited by 1,536 · see citing works
Where the really hard problems are
Cheeseman, P., Kanefsky, B., & Taylor, W. M. (1991) · Cited by 1,015 · see citing works
The computational complexity of propositional STRIPS planning
Bylander, T. (1994) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(94)90081-7 · Cited by 866 · see citing works
The LAMA Planner: Guiding Cost-Based Anytime Planning with Landmarks
Richter, S., & Westphal, M. (2010) · Cited by 510 · see citing works
Parameter Estimation in Large Dynamic Paired Comparison Experiments
Glickman, M. E. (1999) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · doi:10.1111/1467-9876.00159 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
Gerevini, A., Haslum, P., Long, D. P., Saetti, A., & Dimopoulos, Y. (2008) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2008.10.012 · Cited by 294 · see citing works
The 3rd International Planning Competition: Results and Analysis
Long, D. P., & Fox, M. (2003) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1240 · Cited by 289 · see citing works
Flexible abstraction heuristics for optimal sequential planning
Helmert, M., Haslum, P., & Hoffmann, J. (2007) · ANU Open Research (Australian National University) · Cited by 208 · see citing works
The LAMA Planner: Guiding Cost-Based Anytime Planning with Landmarks
Richter, S., & Westphal, M. (2010) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.2972 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
VAL: automatic plan validation, continuous effects and mixed initiative planning using PDDL
Howey, R., Long, D., & Fox, M. (2005) · 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1109/ictai.2004.120 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Temporal planning with mutual exclusion reasoning
Smith, D. E., & Weld, D. S. (1999) · Cited by 182 · see citing works
The Deterministic Part of IPC-4: An Overview
Hoffmann, J., & Edelkamp, S. (2005) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1677 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
When is temporal planning really temporal
Cushing, W., Subbarao Kambhampati, B., & Weld, D. S. (2007) · Cited by 144 · see citing works
The International SAT Solver Competitions
Järvisalo, M., Berre, D. L., Roussel, O., & Simon, L. (2012) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v33i1.2395 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Where Ignoring Delete Lists Works: Local Search Topology in Planning Benchmarks
Hoffmann, J. (2003) · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Complexity results for standard benchmark domains in planning
Helmert, M. (2003) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/s0004-3702(02)00364-8 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Planning Through Stochastic Local Search and Temporal Action Graphs in LPG
Gerevini, A., Saetti, A., & Serina, I. (2003) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1183 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
A Survey of the Seventh International Planning Competition
Coles, A., Coles, A., García‐Olaya, Á., Jiménez, S., López, C. L., Sanner, S., & Yoon, S. (2012) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v33i1.2392 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Self-citationHelmert, M., & Röger, G. (2008) · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Best-First Heuristic Search for Multicore Machines
Burns, E., Lemons, S., Ruml, W., & Zhou, R. (2010) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.3094 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Baier, J. A., & McIlraith, S. A. (2008) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v29i4.2204 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Complexity of concurrent temporal planning
Rintanen, J. (2007) · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Soft Goals Can Be Compiled Away
Keyder, E., & Geffner, H. (2009) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.2857 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Engineering Benchmarks for Planning: the Domains Used in the Deterministic Part of IPC-4
Hoffmann, J., Edelkamp, S., Thiébaux, S., Englert, R. A., Liporace, F. S., & Trüg, S. (2006) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1982 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Analyzing Search Topology Without Running Any Search: On the Connection Between Causal Graphs and h+
Hoffmann, J. (2011) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.3276 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
New complexity results for classical planning benchmarks
Helmert, M. (2006) · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Evaluation of a simple, scalable, parallel best-first search strategy
Kishimoto, A., Fukunaga, A. S., & Botea, A. (2012) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2012.10.007 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Valenzano, R., Sturtevant, N., Schaeffer, J., Buro, K., & Kishimoto, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v20i1.13423 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
“Distance”? Who Cares? Tailoring Merge-and-Shrink Heuristics to Detect Unsolvability
Jörg, H., Kissmann, P., & Torralba, Á. (2014) · Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-419-0-441 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Learning from planner performance
Roberts, M., & Howe, A. E. (2008) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2008.11.009 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Automated Planning for Liner Shipping Fleet Repositioning
Tierney, K., Coles, A., Coles, A., Kroer, C., Britt, A., & Jensen, R. M. (2012) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v22i1.13500 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
The 2011 International Planning Competition
García‐Olaya, Á., Jiménez, S., & López, C. L. (2011) · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Self-citationPlan-based Policies for Efficient Multiple Battery Load Management
Fox, M., Long, D., & Magazzeni, D. (2012) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.3643 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Fast Detection of Unsolvable Planning Instances Using Local Consistency
Bäckström, C., Jönsson, P., & Ståhlberg, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial Search · doi:10.1609/socs.v4i1.18294 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Where 'Ignoring Delete Lists' Works: Local Search Topology in Planning Benchmarks
Hoffmann, J. (2005) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1747 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
A probabilistic analysis of prepositional STRIPS planning
Bylander, T. (1996) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(95)00055-0 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Accuracy of admissible heuristic functions in selected planning domains
Helmert, M., & Mattmüller, R. (2008) · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Evaluating temporal planning domains
Cushing, W., Subbarao Kambhampati, B., Talamadupula, K., & Weld, D. S. (2007) · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Exploiting the Computational Power of the Graphics Card: Optimal State Space Planning on the GPU
Sulewski, D., Edelkamp, S., & Kissmann, P. (2011) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v21i1.13464 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
The Answer Set Programming Competition
Calimeri, F., Ianni, G., Krennwallner, T., & Ricca, F. (2012) · AI Magazine · doi:10.1609/aimag.v33i4.2448 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
On the Hardness of Decision and Optimisation Problems
Slaney, J., & Thiébaux, S. (1998) · ANU Open Research (Australian National University) · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Phase transitions in classical planning: an experimental study
Rintanen, J. (2004) · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Automating the evaluation of planning systems
López, C. L., Jiménez, S., & Helmert, M. (2013) · AI Communications · doi:10.3233/aic-130572 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
On the Discovery and Utility of Precedence Constraints in Temporal Planning
Hu, Y., Yin, M., & Cai, D. (2011) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v25i1.8052 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
3 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- B.R. Kavuluri, Required concurrency without a scheduler, in: Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Workshop of the UK Special Interest Group on Planning and Scheduling, PlanSig-10, Brescia, Italy, 2010, pp. 71-78.
- J. Hoffmann, A tough nuts track for the IPC, in: The ICAPS-07 Workshop International Planning Competition: Past, Present and Future, Providence (Rhode Island), United States, 2007.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Learning action models with minimal observability
Aineto, D., Jiménez Celorrio, S., & Onaindia, E. (2019) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2019.05.003 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Efficient symbolic search for cost-optimal planning
Torralba, Á., Alcázar, V., Kissmann, P., & Edelkamp, S. (2016) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2016.10.001 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Vallati, M., Chrpa, L., & McCluskey, T. L. (2018) · The Knowledge Engineering Review · doi:10.1017/s0269888918000012 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
The IBaCoP Planning System: Instance-Based Configured Portfolios
Cenamor, I., de la Rosa, T., & Fernández, F. (2016) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.5080 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Methods for Detecting Unsolvable Planning Instances using Variable Projection
Ståhlberg, S. (2017) · Linköping studies in science and technology. Dissertations · doi:10.3384/diss.diva-139802 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
AI and the Future of Skills, Volume 2
OECD (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/a9fe53cb-en · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Automatic Instance Generation for Classical Planning
Torralba, Á., Seipp, J., & Sievers, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v31i1.15983 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Static and Dynamic Portfolio Methods for Optimal Planning: An Empirical Analysis
Rizzini, M., Fawcett, C., Vallati, M., Gerevini, A., & Hoos, H. H. (2017) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools · doi:10.1142/s0218213017600065 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Aineto, D., Jiménez, S., Onaindía, E., & Ramírez, M. (2021) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v29i1.3547 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Portfolio-based planning: State of the art, common practice and open challenges
Vallati, M., Chrpa, L., & Kitchin, D. E. (2015) · AI Communications · doi:10.3233/aic-150671 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Automatic construction of optimal static sequential portfolios for AI planning and beyond
Núñez, S., Borrajo, D., & López, C. L. (2015) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2015.05.005 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Expressing and Exploiting the Common Subgoal Structure of Classical Planning Domains Using Sketches
Drexler, D., Seipp, J., & Geffner, H. (2021) · Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning · doi:10.24963/kr.2021/25 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Action Graphs for Performing Goal Recognition Design on Human-Inhabited Environments
Harman, H., & Simoens, P. (2019) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s19122741 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
STRIPS Action DiscoveryPreprint
Suárez, A. M., Segovia‐Aguas, J., Carme Torras, A., & Alenyà, G. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.11457 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Planetarium: A Rigorous Benchmark for Translating Text to Structured Planning Languages
Zuo, M., Velez, F. P., Li, X., Littman, M., & Bach, S. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.naacl-long.560 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“We show how to make this algorithm efficient for three domains: Blocks World, Gripper, and a slightly simplified Floor Tile (McDermott, 2000; Linares López et al., 2015).”
A Temporal Relaxed Planning Graph Heuristic for Planning with Envelopes
Coles, A., & Coles, A. (2017) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v27i1.13813 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Refining complexity analyses in planning by exploiting the exponential time hypothesis
Aghighi, M., Bäckström, C., Jönsson, P., & Ståhlberg, S. (2016) · Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10472-016-9521-y · Cited by 4 · see citing works
A Planning Approach to Repair Domains with Incomplete Action Effects
Gragera, A., Fuentetaja, R., García‐Olaya, Á., & Fernández, F. (2023) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v33i1.27190 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citationMEvo: a framework for effective macro sets evolution
Vallati, M., Chrpa, L., & Serina, I. (2019) · Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1080/0952813x.2019.1672796 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Performance robustness of AI planners in the 2014 International Planning Competition
Bocchese, A. F., Fawcett, C., Vallati, M., Gerevini, A., & Hoos, H. H. (2018) · AI Communications · doi:10.3233/aic-170537 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Drexler, D., Seipp, J., & Geffner, H. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2105.04250 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
REINFORCED ENCODING FOR PLANNING AS SAT
Balyo, T., Barták, R., & Trunda, O. (2015) · Acta Polytechnica CTU Proceedings · doi:10.14311/app.2015.1.0001 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Desiderata for Planning Systems in General-Purpose Service RobotsPreprint
Walker, N., Jiang, Y., Çakmak, M., & Stone, P. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.02300 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Palmieri, J., Lippi, M., & Marino, A. (2026) · Robotics and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1016/j.robot.2026.105480 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Selecting goals in oversubscription planning using relaxed plans
García‐Olaya, Á., de la Rosa, T., & Borrajo, D. (2020) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2020.103414 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citationFormal Representations of Classical Planning Domains
Grundke, C., Röger, G., & Helmert, M. (2024) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v34i1.31481 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Modelling and solving industrial production tasks as planning-scheduling tasks
Nyporko, A., & Chrpa, L. (2025) · Data & Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.datak.2025.102415 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Efficient Temporal Planning Using Metastates
Coles, A., Coles, A., & Beck, J. C. (2019) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33017554 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
AI direct tests: LNE and NIST evaluations
Messina, E. R., Avrin, G., & Ribeiro, S. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/982e32ab-en · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Assessing AI capabilities on occupational tests
Kalamova, M. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/4bd0d136-en · Cited by 1 · see citing works
On the Evolution of Planner-Specific Macro Sets
Vallati, M., Chrpa, L., & Serina, I. (2017) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70169-1_33 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Discrete Word Embedding for Logical Natural Language UnderstandingPreprint
Asai, M., & Tang, Z. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2008.11649 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Accelerating Heuristic Search for AI Planning
Xu, Y. (2014) · PubMed · doi:10.7936/k7m043jr
A hybrid bit-encoding for SAT planning based on clique-partitioning
Tapia, C., Segundo, P. S., & Galán, R. (2017) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/1.4996672
Scalable and optimal planning based on Pregel
Jiang, Z., & Rao, D. (2018) · Concurrency and Computation Practice and Experience · doi:10.1002/cpe.4966
Width-Based Planning and Active Learning for AtariPreprint
Ayton, B., & Asai, M. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Inference and Learning with Planning Models
García, D. A. (2022) · doi:10.4995/thesis/10251/185355
Is Policy Learning Overrated?: Width-Based Planning and Active Learning for Atari
Ayton, B., & Asai, M. (2022) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · doi:10.1609/icaps.v32i1.19841
The effect of incentives on the final response rate
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/fb761a19-en
Eliciting expert knowledge: Methods and challenges
Baret, A., Révai, N., Rowe, G., & Bolger, F. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/4b900c5c-en
Rater values selection on consistency facets for eight evaluation campaigns by NIST and LNE
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/0f08767a-en
Share of questions that receive more than 20% of uncertain ratings in different assessments
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/ddf4ae3c-en
Project goals, constraints and next steps
Elliott, S. W. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/e0f758b7-en
Rater values selection on validity facets for eight evaluation campaigns by NIST and LNE
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/837e11ea-en
AI capability expert ratings, by task
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/a5af2dd6-en
Experts' ratings of AI and GPT-3.5 performance on PISA science questions
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/968ed16a-en
A framework for characterising evaluation instruments of AI performance
Cohn, A. G., & Hernández‐Orallo, J. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/f585066f-en
OECD (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/924ba903-en
OECD (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/62ff4d1d-en
AI capability expert ratings and their comparison to the ratings of the first study
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/90706fb4-en
Towards a synthesis of language capability in humans and AI
Graham, Y. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/436a79da-en
AI numeracy performance in 2016 and 2021, by question difficulty
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/ec49abf8-en
Rater value selection on validity facets
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/9bf0a992-en
Raters value selection on fairness facets
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/4aec8859-en
Raters value selection on consistency facets
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/5aee1acd-en
Distribution of expert ratings of AI and robotics performance on entire task
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/4cdef7cc-en
Staneva, M., Rüschoff, B., & Ackerman, P. L. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/70bf5ebf-en
Average AI and robotics performance, by expert and expertise
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/36f314ec-en
Assessing AI capabilities with education tests
Staneva, M., Baret, A., Aso-Mollar, Á., Blass, J. A., Carrión, S., Conitzer, V., Ulises Cortés, A., Dasigi, P., de Paula, A., Galindo, C., et al. (2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/bbdeb1e0-en
AI and robotics performance in broad capability domains, by task and expertise
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/31548862-en
Divergence in experts’ evaluations in different assessments
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/c08cd12e-en
AI and robotics performance on entire task, by task format
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/ad5d585d-en
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/303c00ee-en
Rater agreement across all facets
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/866a2f89-en
Rater values selection on fairness facets for eight evaluation campaigns by NIST and LNE
(2023) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/aaa8a5bb-en
Expressing and Exploiting Subgoal Structure in Classical Planning Using Sketches
Drexler, D., Seipp, J., & Geffner, H. (2024) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1.15821
OECD (2024) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/6b3eb336-fr
OECD (2024) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/2713e65f-fr
OECD (2024) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/da5313b2-de
OECD (2024) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/c2b59fc2-de
Arriola-Ríos, V. E., & de la Cruz, V. G. M. (2026) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-37441-7_38
- Authors
- Linares López, C., Jiménez Celorrio, S., & García Olaya, Á.
- Venue
- Artificial Intelligence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-06
- Volume
- 223
- Pages
- 82-119
- ISSN
- 0004-3702 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2042590837
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 4.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- Funders
- Decide Soluciones
- iActive
- University Carlos III de Madrid
- ICAPS
- Spanish Science Ministry (TIN2008-06701-C03-03)
- MINECO (TIN2011-27652-C03-02)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Constraint Satisfaction and Optimization
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Keywords
- International Planning Competition, deterministic planning, planning and scheduling, concurrency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
