Abstract:How people plan is an active area of research in cognitive science, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. However, tasks traditionally used to study planning in the laboratory tend to be constrained to artificial environments, such as Chess and bandit problems. To date there is still no agreed-on model of how people plan in realistic contexts, such as navigation and search, where values intuitively derive from interactions between perception and cognition. To address this gap and move towards a more naturalistic study of planning, we present a novel spatial Maze Search Task (MST) where the costs and rewards are physically situated as distances and locations. We used this task in two behavioral experiments to evaluate and contrast multiple distinct computational models of planning, including optimal expected utility planning, several one-step heuristics inspired by studies of information search, and a family of planners that deviate from optimal planning, in which action values are estimated by the interactions between perception and cognition. We found that people's deviations from optimal expected utility are best explained by planners with a limited horizon, however our results do not exclude the possibility that in human planning action values may be also affected by cognitive mechanisms of numerosity and probability perception. This result makes a novel theoretical contribution in showing that limited planning horizon generalizes to spatial planning, and demonstrates the value of our multi-model approach for understanding cognition. We present a computational study of spatial planning under uncertainty using a novel Maze Search Task (MST), in which people search mazes for probabilistically hidden rewards. The MST is designed to resemble real-life spatial planning, where costs and rewards are physically situated as distances and locations. We found that people's spatial planning is best explained by planners with limited planning horizon, as opposed to both myopic heuristics or the optimal expected utility, showing that a limited planning horizon can generalize to spatial planning tasks. We also find that our results do not exclude the possibility that in human planning action values may be affected by cognitive mechanisms of numerosity and probability perception.

Total-Order and Partial-Order Planning: A Comparative Analysis

Some Orders Are Important: Partially Preserving Orders in Top-Quality Planning

Multi-Valued Partial Order Plans in Numeric Planning

Partial-Order, Partially-Seen Observations of Fluents or Actions for Plan Recognition as Planning

Intention as Hierarchical Constraints in Human Planning

Preference-Based Planning in Stochastic Environments: From Partially-Ordered Temporal Goals to Most Preferred Policies

A Critical Assessment of Benchmark Comparison in Planning

Reasoning and Predicting POMDP Planning Complexity Via Covering Numbers

Efficient Open World Reasoning for Planning

iSNEAK: Partial Ordering as Heuristics for Model-Based Reasoning in Software Engineering

Flaw Selection Strategies for Partial-Order Planning

Planning as Theorem Proving with Heuristics

The Metrics Matter! On the Incompatibility of Different Flavors of Replanning

A Planning Ontology to Represent and Exploit Planning Knowledge for Performance Efficiency

Task Planning in Robotics: an Empirical Comparison of PDDL-based and ASP-based Systems

Approximate planning in spatial search

A User Study on Contrastive Explanations for Multi-Effector Temporal Planning with Non-Stationary Costs

Hybrid Search for Efficient Planning with Completeness Guarantees

Evaluation of Study Plans using Partial Orders

An approach to multi-agent planning with incomplete information

Improving Execution Concurrency in Partial-Order Plans via Block-Substitution