Plan commitment: Replanning versus plan repair

While executing its plan in a dynamic environment where multiple agents are operating, an autonomous agent may suffer a failure due to discrepancies between the expected and actual context and thus must replace its obsolete plan. In its endeavour to fix the failure and reach its original goals, the agent may unknowingly disrupt other agents executing their plans in the same environment. We present a property for plan repair called plan commitment to ensure a responsible repair policy among agents that aims to minimise the negative impact on others. We present arguments to support the claim that plan commitment is a valuable property when an agent may have made bookings and commitments to others. We then propose C-TFLAP, an implementation of a plan repair heuristic that allows adapting a failed plan to the new context while committing as much as possible to the original plan. We demonstrate empirically that: (1) our plan repair achieves more committed plans than plan-stability repair when an agent has made bookings and commitments to others, and (2) compared to typical replanning and plan-stability repair, it can reduce the revisions among agents when failures are avoidable and can decrease the time-loss otherwise. In addition, to demonstrate extensibility, we integrate context-aware knowledge extension with committed repairing to increase the agent’s chances of repairing.