Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Engineering
AI and Machine Learning
er a tiny Robot World (robot R in a room) which : R walks out of the room R unlocks the door.

er a tiny Robot World (robot R in a room) which : R walks out of the room R unlocks the door.

icon
Related questions
Question
100%
Note that for this question, you can in addition use ` `land" for the symbol ``lor" for the symbol V 7 ``Inot" for the symbol - ``is_not" for the symbol # Consider a tiny Robot World (robot R in a room) which has two actions: walkout: R walks out of the room unlock: R unlocks the door. two fluents: DoorLocked: the room door is locked, InsideRoom: R is inside the room.
Transcribed Image Text:Note that for this question, you can in addition use ` `land" for the symbol ``lor" for the symbol V 7 ``Inot" for the symbol - ``is_not" for the symbol # Consider a tiny Robot World (robot R in a room) which has two actions: walkout: R walks out of the room unlock: R unlocks the door. two fluents: DoorLocked: the room door is locked, InsideRoom: R is inside the room.
a) R can walk out of the room iff R is inside the room and the door is not locked. Meanwhile, R can unlock the door if it is locked. Write the precondition axioms for these two actions. b) Consequence of the action walking-out is that the fluent InsideRoom becomes false. Consequence of the action of unlocking is that DoorLocked is false. Assuming explanation closure, write the successor state axioms for these two fluents. c) If in the initial state SO, we have both fluents (DoorLocked, InsideRoom) true, would the following sequence of actions a legal one? do(walkout, do(unlock, SO)) If yes, what would be the fluent values in the state resulting from executing the sequence. d) Again if in the initial state SO, we have DoorLocked, InsideRoom, would the following sequence a legal one? do(unlock, do(walkout, SO)) If yes, what would be the fluent values in the state resulting from executing the sequence.
Transcribed Image Text:a) R can walk out of the room iff R is inside the room and the door is not locked. Meanwhile, R can unlock the door if it is locked. Write the precondition axioms for these two actions. b) Consequence of the action walking-out is that the fluent InsideRoom becomes false. Consequence of the action of unlocking is that DoorLocked is false. Assuming explanation closure, write the successor state axioms for these two fluents. c) If in the initial state SO, we have both fluents (DoorLocked, InsideRoom) true, would the following sequence of actions a legal one? do(walkout, do(unlock, SO)) If yes, what would be the fluent values in the state resulting from executing the sequence. d) Again if in the initial state SO, we have DoorLocked, InsideRoom, would the following sequence a legal one? do(unlock, do(walkout, SO)) If yes, what would be the fluent values in the state resulting from executing the sequence.
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer