English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

When autonomous agents are executing in the real world, the state of theworld as well as the objectives of the agent may change from the agent'soriginal model. In such cases, the agent's planning process must modify theplan under execution to make it amenable to the new conditions, and to resumeexecution. This brings up the replanning problem, and the various techniquesthat have been proposed to solve it. In all, three main techniques -- based onthree different metrics -- have been proposed in prior automated planning work.An open question is whether these metrics are interchangeable; answering thisrequires a normalized comparison of the various replanning quality metrics. Inthis paper, we show that it is possible to support such a comparison bycompiling all the respective techniques into a single substrate. Using thisnovel compilation, we demonstrate that these different metrics are notinterchangeable, and that they are not good surrogates for each other. Thus wefocus attention on the incompatibility of the various replanning flavors witheach other, founded in the differences between the metrics that theyrespectively seek to optimize.

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