1) (agents and environment simulators) For each of the following domains, which type of agent is appropriate (table lookup, reflex, goal based, or utility based). Also, indicate the type of environment: a) An agent that plays Poker. b) An agent that can play Tic-Tac-Toe. c) An autonomous humanoid robot that can win the DARPA robotics challenge (driving a car, walking across debris, connecting two pipes). Scoring depends on success in the tasks, on execution speed, and on using as little communication with the operator as possible. d) An internet coordination agent (sets meetings between humans with conflicting goals). e) An agent that can play peg-and-hole solitaire. f) An agent that plays Go optimally. 2) (Search): Show the run of the following algorithms on the setting of question 6 below, where the agent starting at V0 needs to reach the goal V2 with minimal cost, where costs are as defined in assignment 1. Assume that h(n) is the cost to reach the goal state in the simplified problem that assumes that the agent is always carrying exactly the minimal amount of food needed to cross an edge before traversing it (i.e. shortest path in the graph of edges with the weights squared). a) Greedy search (f(n) = h(n)), breaking ties in favor of states where the higher node number. b) A* search, (f(n) = g(n)+h(n)), breaking ties as above. c) Simplified RTA* with a limit of 2 expansions per real action, breaking ties as above. c) Repeat a-c but using h'(n) = 2*h(n) as the heuristic. Is h'(n) admissible? 3) (Game trees): Consider a 3-person game (A, B, C) with complete information and deterministic environment. Suppose A has 5 possible moved. Provide a game tree example that shows that for each of the following set of rules, A will have a different optimal move: a) Each agent out for itself, and they cannot communicate. b) B and C may agree on a deal if it is beneficial to both of them c) B and C may agree on a deal if it is nebeficial to both, but C is allowed to violate it (but B does not know that). d) A and B may reach a deal, if it is beneficial to both of them e) As in a, but in case of tie-breaking do a move that is worse for A. Explain your answer by showing the computed values in the internal nodes in each case. Note that you should probably make the example more concise by allowing only ONE choice of action for some of the players in some of the branches. 4) (Game-tree search - alpha-beta pruning) a) Give an example of a 3-ply game tree (branching factor 2) where alpha-beta pruning saving is maximal. How many nodes are pruned? b) Suppose that we know ahead of time that the terminal values can only be integers between -10 and 10. Is there a case where alpha-beta can save even more search than the best case above (show it, or prove that it cannot help). c) Provide an example of a 2-ply + 2 chance nodes level game tree where one can apply an adapted alpha-beta to prune some nodes, and a similar example where changing the distribution on the chance node edges results in no savings for pruning. 5) (Propositional logic) For each of the following sentences, determine whether they are satisfiable, unsatisfiable, and/or valid. For each sentence determine the number of models (over the propositional variables in the sentence). Bonus question: in case b, also trace the run of the DPLL algorithm for satisfiability with this formula as input (i.e. explain any recursive calls and cases encountered). a) (A and (A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> C b) (A or not B or D) and (not A or B) and (not A or not B or D) and (A or not B) c) (A or B or C or D or E or F) d) (A and not A) and (Not B) e) (A and (A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> not C f) not ((A and (A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> C) g) A -> not A 6) (FOL and situation calculus) We need to represent and reason within the scenario defined by assignment 1. For simplicity, we will ignore the issue of action costs, and assume only one Yazidi refugee agent. a) Write down the axioms for the behavior of the world using FOL and situation calculus. Use the predicates: Edge(e, v1, v2) ; e is an edge in the graph between v1 and v2. Goal(v) ; Vertex v is a goal site. Also use the fluents (situation-dependent predicates) Loc(v,s) ; Agent is at vertex v in situation s Carrying(f,s) ; Agent is carrying f units of food in situation s. Food(v,f, s) ; There are f units of food at vertex v in situation s. Constants: as needed, for the edges and vertices, and simple actions (noop). Functions: weight(e) ; Function denoting the weight of edge e traverse(e) ; Denotes a traverse move action across edge e (may be ineffective) and of course the "Result" function: Result(a,s) ; Denotes the situation resulting from doing action a in ; situation s. You may wish to add auxiliary predicates or fluents in order to simplify the axioms. In this assignment you will need arithmetic functions and predicates, be sure to define them formally! You are allowed to do so provided you explain why they are needed. Let the facts representing the scenario be:Edge(E1, V0, V1) Edge(E2, V1, V2) Edge(E3, V0, V2) Goal(V2) Weight(E1)=1 Weight(E2)=4 Weight(E3)=2 ; with situation S0 fluents being: Loc(V0, S0) Food(V1,3,S0) Food(V0,0,S0) Food(V2,0,S0) Carrying(1,S0)b) Now, we need to find a sequence of actions that will result in reaching the goal from S0, andprovea theorem that it will do so. Do the following steps: A) Convert the knowledge base to conjunctive normal form. (This is very long, so you may omit the parts not needed in the proof below). B) Formally list what we need to prove (a theorem), and state its negation. C) Use resolution to reach a contradiction, thus proving the theorem. At each step of the proof, specify the resolvents and the unifier/ c) Would there be a potential problem in the proof if we did not have "frame axioms" in our representation (i.e. stating what didnotchange), and if so, what? d) Would we be able to do the proof using only forward chaining? Justify all answers shortly!

Deadline: Noon (12:00), Tuesday, December 9, 2014 (** strict**
deadline).

Submissions are to be **solo**.