Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 5
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:

Authors and Affiliations

Piotr Karwat
1

  1. Department of Ultrasound, Institute of Fundamental Technological Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Optimal random network coding is reduced complexity in computation of coding coefficients, computation of encoded packets and coefficients are such that minimal transmission bandwidth is enough to transmit coding coefficient to the destinations and decoding process can be carried out as soon as encoded packets are started being received at the destination and decoding process has lower computational complexity. But in traditional random network coding, decoding process is possible only after receiving all encoded packets at receiving nodes. Optimal random network coding also reduces the cost of computation. In this research work, coding coefficient matrix size is determined by the size of layers which defines the number of symbols or packets being involved in coding process. Coding coefficient matrix elements are defined such that it has minimal operations of addition and multiplication during coding and decoding process reducing computational complexity by introducing sparseness in coding coefficients and partial decoding is also possible with the given coding coefficient matrix with systematic sparseness in coding coefficients resulting lower triangular coding coefficients matrix. For the optimal utility of computational resources, depending upon the computational resources unoccupied such as memory available resources budget tuned windowing size is used to define the size of the coefficient matrix.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Dhawa Sang Dong
Yagnya Murti Pokhrel
Anand Gachhadar
Ram Krishna Maharjan
Faizan Qamar
Iraj Sadegh Amiri
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Classical planning in Artificial Intelligence is a computationally expensive problem of finding a sequence of actions that transforms a given initial state of the problem to a desired goal situation. Lack of information about the initial state leads to conditional and conformant planning that is more difficult than classical one. A parallel plan is the plan in which some actions can be executed in parallel, usually leading to decrease of the plan execution time but increase of the difficulty of finding the plan. This paper is focused on three planning problems which are computationally difficult: conditional, conformant and parallel conformant. To avoid these difficulties a set of transformations to Linear Programming Problem (LPP), illustrated by examples, is proposed. The results show that solving LPP corresponding to the planning problem can be computationally easier than solving the planning problem by exploring the problem state space. The cost is that not always the LPP solution can be interpreted directly as a plan.
Go to article

Bibliography

[1] J.L. Ambite and C.A. Knoblock: Planning by rewriting. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 15 (2001), 207–261, DOI: 10.1613/jair.754.
[2] Ch. Backstrom: Computational Aspects of Reordering Plans. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 9 (1998), 99–137, DOI: 10.1613/jair.477.
[3] Ch. Baral, V. Kreinovich, and R. Trejo: Computational complexity of planning and approximate planning in the presence of incompleteness. Artificial Intelligence, 122 (2000), 241–267, DOI: 10.1007/3-540-44957-4_59.
[4] R. Bartak: Constraint satisfaction techniques in planning and scheduling: An introduction. Archives of Control Sciences, 18(2), (2008), DOI: 10.1007/s10845-008-0203-4.
[5] A. Bhattacharya and P. Vasant: Soft-sensing of level of satisfaction in TOC product-mix decision heuristic using robust fuzzy-LP, European Journal of Operational Research, 177(1), (2007), 55–70, DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2005.11.017.
[6] J. Blythe: An Overview of Planning Under Uncertainty. Pre-print from AI Magazine, 20(2), (1999), 37–54, DOI: 10.1007/3-540-48317-9_4.
[7] T. Bylander: The Computational Complexity of Propositional STRIPS Planning. Artificial Intelligence, 69 (1994), 165–204, DOI: 10.1016/0004- 3702(94)90081-7.
[8] T. Bylander: A Linear Programming Heuristic for Optimal Planning. In Proc. of AAAI Nat. Conf., (1997).
[9] L.G. Chaczijan: A polynomial algorithm for linear programming. Dokł. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 244 (1979), 1093–1096.
[10] E.R. Dougherty and Ch.R. Giardina: Mathematical Methods for Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems, Prentice-Hall International, Inc. USA, 1988.
[11] I. Elamvazuthi, P. Vasant, and T. Ganesan: Fuzzy Linear Programming using Modified Logistic Membership Function, International Review of Automatic Control, 3(4), (2010), 370–377, DOI: 10.3923/jeasci.2010.239.245.
[12] A. Galuszka: On transformation of STRIPS planning to linear programming. Archives of Control Sciences, 21(3), (2011), 227–251, DOI: 10.2478/v10170-010-0042-3.
[13] A. Galuszka, W. Ilewicz, and A. Olczyk: On Translation of Conformant Action Planning to Linear Programming. Proc. 20th International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation & Robotics, 24–27 August, (2005), 353–357, DOI: 10.1109/MMAR.2015.7283901.
[14] A. Galuszka, T. Grzejszczak, J. Smieja, A. Olczyk, and J. Kocerka: On parallel conformant planning as an optimization problem. 32nd Annual European Simulation and Modelling Conference, Ghent, (2018), 17–22.
[15] M. Ghallab et al.: PDDL – the Planning Domain Definition Language, Version 1.2. Technical Report DCS TR-1165, Yale Center for Computational Vision and Control, (1998).
[16] A. Grastien and E. Scala: Sampling Strategies for Conformant Planning. Proc. Twenty-Eighth International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, (2018), 97–105.
[17] A. Grastien and E. Scala: CPCES: A planning framework to solve conformant planning problems through a counterexample guided refinement. Artificial Intelligence, 284 (2020), 103271, DOI: 10.1016/j.artint.2020.103271.
[18] D. Hoeller, G. Behnke, P. Bercher, S. Biundo, H. Fiorino, D. Pellier, and R. Alford: HDDL: An extension to PDDL for expressing hierarchical planning problems. Proc. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 34(6), (2020), 1–9, DOI: 10.1609/aaai.v34i06.6542.
[19] J. Koehler and K. Schuster: Elevator Control as a Planning Problem. AIPS-2000, (2000), 331–338.
[20] R. van der. Krogt: Modification strategies for SAT-based plan adaptation. Archives of Control Sciences, 18(2), (2008).
[21] M.D. Madronero, D. Peidro, and P. Vasant: Vendor selection problem by using an interactive fuzzy multi-objective approach with modified s-curve membership functions. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 60 (2010), 1038–1048, DOI: 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.03.060.
[22] A. Nareyek, C. Freuder, R. Fourer, E. Giunchiglia, R.P. Goldman, H. Kautz, J. Rintanen, and A. Tate: Constraitns and AI Planning. IEEE Intelligent Systems, (2005), 62–72, DOI: 10.1109/MIS.2005.25.
[23] N.J. Nilson: Principles of Artificial Intelligence. Toga Publishing Company, Palo Alto, CA, 1980.
[24] E.P.D. Pednault: ADL and the state-transition model of action. Journal of Logic and Computation, 4(5), (1994), 467–512, DOI: 10.1093/logcom/4.5.467.
[25] D. Peidro and P. Vasant: Transportation planning with modified scurve membership functions using an interactive fuzzy multi-objective approach, Applied Soft Computing, 11 (2011), 2656–2663, DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2010.10.014.
[26] F. Pommerening, G. Roger, M. Helmert, H. Cambazard, L.M. Rousseau, and D. Salvagnin: Lagrangian decomposition for classical planning. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (2020), 4770—4774, DOI: 10.24963/ijcai. 2020/663.
[27] T. Rosa, S. Jimenez, R. Fuentetaja, and D. Barrajo: Scaling up heuristic planning with relational decision trees. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 40 (2011), 767–813, DOI: 10.1613/jair.3231.
[28] S.J. Russell and P. Norvig: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Fourth Edition. Pearson, 2020.
[29] J. Seipp, T. Keller, and M. Helmert: Saturated post-hoc optimization for classical planning. Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (2021).
[30] D.E. Smith and D.S. Weld: Conformant Graphplan. Proc. 15th National Conf. on AI, (1998).
[31] D.S. Weld: Recent Advantages in AI Planning. AI Magazine, (1999), DOI: 10.1609/aimag.v20i2.1459.
[32] D.S. Weld, C.R. Anderson, and D.E. Smith: Extending graphplan to handle uncertainty & sensing actions. Proc. 15th National Conf. on AI, (1998), 897–904.
[33] X. Zhang, A. Grastien, and E. Scala: Computing superior counterexamples for conformant planning. Proc. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 34(6), (2020), 1–8, DOI: 10.1609/aaai.v34i06.6558.


Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Adam Galuszka
1
Eryka Probierz
1

  1. Department of Automatic Control and Robotics, Silesian University of Technology, Akademicka 16, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Visible light communication based on a filter bank multicarrier holds enormous promise for optical wireless communication systems, due to its high-speed and unlicensed spectrum. Moreover, visible light communication techniques greatly impact communication links for small satellites like cube satellites, and pico/nano satellites, in addition to inter-satellite communications between different satellite types in different orbits. However, the transmitted visible signal via the filter bank multicarrier has a high amount of peak-to-average power ratio, which results in severe distortion for a light emitting diode output. In this work, a scheme for enhancing the peak-to-average power ratio reduction amount is proposed. First, an algorithm based on generating two candidates signals with different peak-to-average power ratio is suggested. The signal with the lowest ratio is selected and transmitted. Second, an alternate direct current-biased approach, which is referred to as the addition reversed method, is put forth to transform transmitted signal bipolar values into actual unipolar ones. The performance is assessed through a cumulative distribution function of peak-to-average power ratio, bit error rate, power spectral density, and computational complexity. The simulation results show that, compared to other schemes in literature, the proposed scheme attains a great peak-to-average power ratio reduction and improves the bit the error rate performance with minimum complexity overhead. The proposed approach achieved about 5 dB reduction amount compared to companding technique, 5.5 dB compared to discrete cosine transform precoding, and 8 dB compared to conventional direct current bias of an optical filter bank multicarrier. Thus, the proposed scheme reduces the complexity overhead by 15.7% and 55.55% over discrete cosine transform and companding techniques, respectively.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Radwa A. Roshdy
1
ORCID: ORCID
Aziza I. Hussein
2
ORCID: ORCID
Mohamed M. Mabrook
3 4
ORCID: ORCID
Mohammed A. Salem
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Department of Electrical Engineering, Higher Technological Institute, 10th of Ramadan City, Egypt
  2. Electrical & Computer Eng. Dept., Effat University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
  3. Space Communication Dept., Faculty of Navigation Science & Space Technology, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, Egypt
  4. Department of Communication and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Nahda University in Beni-Suef, Egypt

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more