Link

Planners by Rating

Contributors: Adam Green,

For user convenience we rank planners according to a Quality Assurance metric detailed below. This metric, scores planners between 0 and 100, not based solely on their competitive performance, but rather by a number of factors, with a strong emphasis focused on end user experience.

Such a metric was highly controversial when first proposed, and so this metric comes with a caveat, that planning researchers have not agreed to or support this metric. Over time we aim to fine tune this metric to better capture the elements end users of planning value.

We welcome debate and further input on this system, so if you have any feedback or wish to voice an opinion, a dedicated issue has been opened to discuss this here

Score system

  • 25 points for coverage
    • 5 points for classical coverage
    • 5 points for classical optimal coverage
    • 10 points for temporal-numeric coverage
    • 5 points for expressive features coverage (TILs, Action Costs, Processes, Events)
  • 50 points for end user usability
    • 25 points for published and maintained code including:
      • 10 points for a code publication on a popular public source control system (GitHub, BitBucket, Mercurial etc.)
      • 5 points for including a readme in text/markdown format on how to compile the code for a defined system (e.g. here’s how to compile in on Ubuntu/Fedora/MacOS/Windows etc)
      • 5 points for including an automated script that is guaranteed to work on a developer defined base system with no pre-requisites installed
      • 5 points for clear updates and bug reporting and patching processes
    • 25 points for documentation of planner including
      • 5 points for a readme detailing the major contribution of the planner, and how to use it (e.g. command line/UI instructions)
      • 10 points for an extended readme detailing supported PDDL features, as defined in this wiki or on the eviscerator testing tool - or equivalent table of support attached clearly to the planner or the software repo
      • 10 points for code documentation that outlines structure and implementation of the code
  • 25 points for IPC competitve ranking
    • If n planners participate, and rank in position p the score is 25 * (p/n)

Planners by score

Planner Links Score
Alien Guide Page | Home Page [Not Found] | Paper 38.1
AllPACA Guide Page | Home Page [Not Found] | Paper 31.2
Arvandherd Guide Page | Home Page [Not Found] | Paper 30
Arvand Guide Page | Home Page [Not Found] | Paper 22.6
ACOPlan & ACOPlan 2 Guide Page | Home Page [Not Found] | Paper 15.9

Table of contents