DOCSLIB.ORG

Plan Recognition As Planning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Plan Recognition As Planning Plan Recognition as Planning Miquel Ram´ırez Hector Geffner Universitat Pompeu Fabra ICREA & Universitat Pompeu Fabra 08003 Barcelona, SPAIN 08003 Barcelona, SPAIN [email protected] [email protected] Abstract and consider the plan recognition problem over a domain the- ory and a possible set G of goals. The plan recognition task In this work we aim to narrow the gap between plan is then formulated as the problem of identifying the goals recognition and planning by exploiting the power G ∈Gsuch that some optimal plan for G is compatible and generality of recent planning algorithms for ∗ with the observations. Such goals are grouped into the set recognizing the set G of goals G that explain a se- G∗. The reason for focusing on the optimal plans for G is that quence of observations given a domain theory. Af- they represent the possible behaviors of a perfectly rational ter providing a crisp definition of this set, we show agent pursuing the goal G. By a suitable transformation, we by means of a suitable problem transformation that G G∗ ∗ show that a goal is in if there is an action sequence that a goal G belongs to G if there is an action sequence achieves optimally both the goal G and the goal G extended π that is an optimal plan for both the goal G and the with extra goals Go representing the observations. Exploiting goal G extended with extra goals representing the this result, we show how the set of goals G∗ can be com- observations. Exploiting this result, we show how ∗ puted exactly and approximately by minor modifications of the set G can be computed exactly and approxi- existing optimal and suboptimal planning algorithms, and ex- mately by minor modifications of existing optimal isting polynomial heuristics, that are then tested experimen- and suboptimal planning algorithms, and existing tally over several domains. The suboptimal algorithms and polynomial heuristics. Experiments over several the heuristics appear to provide good approximations of the domains show that the suboptimal planning algo- optimal goal set G∗, while scaling up as well as state-of-the- rithms and the polynomial heuristics provide good ∗ art planning algorithms and heuristics. approximations of the optimal goal set G while The paper is organized as follows. We provide first the ba- scaling up as well as state-of-the-art planning al- sic planning terminology, define the plan recognition problem gorithms and heuristics. over a domain theory, and introduce the transformation that allows us to compile away the observations. We then focus on exact and approximate computational methods, present the 1 Introduction result of the experiments, and discuss limitations and gener- Plan recognition is an ubiquitous task in a number of ar- alizations of the proposed framework. eas, including natural language, multi-agent systems, and as- sisted cognition [Schmidt et al., 1978; Cohen et al., 1981; 2 Planning Background Pentney et al., 2006]. Plan recognition is planning in re- A Strips planning problem is a tuple P = F, I, A, G where verse: while in planning, we seek the actions to achieve F is the set of fluents, I ⊆ F and G ⊆ F are the initial a goal, in plan recognition, we seek the goals that explain and goal situations, and A is a set of actions a with precon- the observed actions. Both are abductive tasks where some dition, add, and delete lists Pre(a), Add(a), and Del(a) re- hypothesis needs to be adopted to account for given data: spectively, all of which are subsets of F . plans to account for goals, and goals to account for par- For each action a ∈ A, we assume that there is a non- tially observed plans. Work in plan recognition, however, negative cost c(a) so that the cost of a sequential plan π = has proceeded independently of the work in planning, us- a1,...,an is c(π)= c(ai). A plan π is optimal if it has ing mostly handcrafted libraries or algorithms that are not minimum cost. For unit costs, i.e., c(a)=1for all a ∈ A, related to planning [Kautz and Allen, 1986; Vilain, 1990; plan cost is plan length, and the optimal plans are the shortest Charniak and Goldman, 1993; Lesh and Etzioni, 1995; Gold- ones. Unless stated otherwise, action costs are assumed to be man et al., 1999; Avrahami-Zilberbrand and Kaminka, 2005]. 1. In this work we aim to narrow the gap between plan recog- In the plan recognition setting over a domain theory, ac- nition and planning by exploiting the power and generality tion costs c(a) carry implicit information about the probabil- of recent classical planning algorithms. For this, we move ity that the agent will use action a to solve a problem P ,as away from the plan recognition problem over a plan library the agent should rationally avoid plans with higher cost than 1778 needed. The most likely plans, assuming full rationality, are Definition 3. The exact solution to a theory T = P, G,O is ∗ the optimal plans, and hence, we will focus initially on them. given by the optimal goal set GT which comprises the goals ∗ Algorithms for computing optimal plans cast the planning G ∈Gsuch that for some π ∈ ΠP (G), π satisfies O. problem as a problem of heuristic search with admissible heuristics derived automatically from the problem encoding [Haslum and Geffner, 2000] . An heuristic h(s) is admis- A B C sible if h(s) ≤ h∗(s) for all the states, where h∗(s) is the optimal cost from s. Optimal planners use such heuristics D HI in the context of admissible search algorithms like A* and EFG IDA*. Computing optimal plans, however, is much harder than computing plans that are good but not necessarily opti- J K mal, and indeed suboptimal planners such as FF and FD, that use more focused search algorithms and more informative heuristics, scale up much better [Hoffmann and Nebel, 2001; Figure 1: Plan Recognition in a Navigation Domain Helmert, 2006]. We will thus use optimal plans for providing a crisp definition of the plan recognition task, and develop ef- Figure 1 shows a simple plan recognition problem. Room ficient methods that borrow from suboptimal planning meth- A (marked with a circle) is the initial position of the agent, ods and heuristics for producing good approximations that while Rooms C, I and K (marked with a square) are its pos- scale up. sible destinations. Arrows between Rooms A and B, and F and G, are the observed agent movements in that order. In the resulting theory T , the only possible goals that have optimal 3 Plan Recognition over a Domain Theory plans compatible with the observation sequence are I and K. The plan recognition problem given a plan library for a set G In the terminology above, the set of possible goals G is given of possible goals G can be understood, at an abstract level, as by the atoms at(C), at(I), and at(K), while the optimal goal ∗ the problem of finding a goal G with a plan π in the library, set GT comprises at(I) and at(K), leaving out the possible written π ∈ ΠL(G), such that π satisfies the observations. goal at(C). We define the plan recognition problem over a domain theory Before proceeding with the methods for computing the op- ∗ in a similar way just changing the set ΠL(G) of plans for G timal goal set GT exactly or approximately, let us first com- ∗ in the library by the set ΠP (G) of optimal plans for G given ment on some of the limitations and strengths of this model of the domain P . We will use P = F, I, O to represent plan- plan recognition. The model can be easily extended to handle ning domains so that a planning problem P [G] is obtained by observations on fluents and not only on actions. For this, the concatenating a planning domain with a goal G, which is any observation of a fluent p can be encoded as the observation of set of fluents. We can then define a plan recognition problem a ’dummy’ action NOOP(p) with precondition and effect p. or theory as follows: Similarly, it is not difficult to account for actions that must be Definition 1. A plan recognition problem or theory is a among the observations when they have been executed. For triplet T = P, G,O where P = F, I, A is a planning this, it suffices to remove such actions from the domain theory domain, G is the set of possible goals G, G ⊆ F , and when they haven’t been observed. Notice that the same tricks do not work in library-based approaches that are less flexible. O = o1,...,om is an observation sequence with each oi be- ing an action in A. Likewise, the assumption that the observations are ordered in a linear sequence is not critical, and can be replaced with We also need to make precise what it means for an ac- no much trouble by a partial order. Library-based recogni- tion sequence to satisfy an observation sequence made up of tion can also be accommodated by a suitable compilation of actions. E.g., the action sequence π = {a, b, c, d, e, a} sat- (acyclic) libraries into Strips [Lekavy´ and Navrat,´ 2007].A isfies the observation sequences O1 = {b, d, a} and O2 = critical aspects of the model is that it does not weight the hy- {a, c, a}, but not O3 = {b, d, c}. This can be formalized with potheses G in G but it just filters them.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FEMA Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans
    Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 Version 2.0 November 2010 I am pleased to announce the release of Version 2.0 of Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101: Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans. Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides guidance for developing emergency operations plans. It promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decision making to help planners examine a hazard or threat and produce integrated, coordinated, and synchronized plans. The goal of CPG 101 is to assist in making the planning process routine across all phases of emergency management and for all homeland security mission areas. This Guide helps planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable, all-hazards, all-threats emergency plans. Based on input from state, territorial, tribal, and local officials from across the United States, this update of CPG 101 expands on the fundamentals contained in the first version. With this edition, greater emphasis is placed on representing and engaging the whole community—to include those with access and functional needs, children, and those with household pets and service animals. Residents and all sectors of the community have a critical role and shared responsibility to take appropriate actions to protect themselves, their families and organizations, and their properties. Planning that engages and includes the whole community serves as the focal point for building a collaborative and resilient community. CPG 101 is the foundation for state, territorial, tribal, and local emergency planning in the United States. Planners in other disciplines, organizations, and the private sector, as well as other levels of government, may find this Guide useful in the development of their emergency operations plans.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing Cities, Planning for People
    Designing cities, planning for people The guide books of Otto-Iivari Meurman and Edmund Bacon Minna Chudoba Tampere University of Technology School of Architecture [email protected] Abstract Urban theorists and critics write with an individual knowledge of the good urban life. Recently, writing about such life has boldly called for smart cities or even happy cities, stressing the importance of social connections and nearness to nature, or social and environmental capital. Although modernist planning has often been blamed for many current urban problems, the social and the environmental dimensions were not completely absent from earlier 20th century approaches to urban planning. Links can be found between the urban utopia of today and the mid-20th century ideas about good urban life. Changes in the ideas of what constitutes good urban life are investigated in this paper through two texts by two different 20th century planners: Otto-Iivari Meurman and Edmund Bacon. Both were taught by the Finnish planner Eliel Saarinen, and according to their teacher’s example, also wrote about their planning ideas. Meurman’s guide book for planners was published in 1947, and was a major influence on Finnish post-war planning. In Meurman’s case, the book answered a pedagogical need, as planners were trained to meet the demands of the structural changes of society and the needs of rapidly growing Finnish cities. Bacon, in a different context, stressed the importance of an urban design attitude even when planning the movement systems of a modern metropolis. Bacon’s book from 1967 was meant for both designers and city dwellers, exploring the dynamic nature of modern urbanity.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Edmund N. Bacon Urban Design Awards
    2020 Edmund N. Bacon Urban Design Awards Student Design Competition Brief $25 | per entry at the time of submission $5,000 | First Prize Award Sign up now for more information www.PhiladelphiaCFA.org IMPORTANT DATES August 1, 2019: Full Competition Packet released + Competition opens November 22, 2019: Final date to submit entries February 2020 (date TBD): Awards Ceremony in Philadelphia EDMUND N. BACON URBAN DESIGN AWARDS Founded in 2006 in memory of Philadelphia’s iconic 20th century city planner, Edmund N. Bacon [1910-2005], this annual program honors both professionals and students whose work epitomize excellence in urban design. Each year, a professional who has made significant contributions to the field of urban planning is selected to receive our Edmund N. Bacon Award. In addition, the winners of an international student urban design competition, envisioning a better Philadelphia, are honored with our Edmund N. Bacon Student Awards. The combined awards ceremony is hosted in Philadelphia each February. 2020 STUDENT AWARDS COMPETITION TOPIC THE BIG PICTURE: REVEALING GERMANTOWN’S ASSETS Chelten Avenue is the heart of the Germantown business district in northwest Philadelphia. The most economically diverse neighborhood in the city, Germantown is an African American community which bridges the economically disadvantaged neighborhoods of North Philadelphia to the east with the wealthier Mount Airy and Chestnut Hill neighborhoods to the west. The Chelten Avenue shopping district benefits from two regional rail stations (along different train lines) and one of the busiest bus stops in the city, located midway between the stations. In addition, the southern end of the shopping district is just steps from the expansive Wissahickon Valley Park, one of the most wild places in Philadelphia, visited by over 1 million people each year.
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenge of Recreation Planning: Methodology and Factors to Consider
    THE CHALLENGE OF RECREATION PLANNING: METHODOLOGY AND FACTORS TO CONSIDER by RONALD B. ULECK, Research Associate, Department of For- estry, University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. This paper is adapted from a Ph.D. dissertation, "Guidelines for preparing development plans for public resource-based outdoor recreation areas." submitted to New York State University College of Forestry at Syracuse Uni- versity, Syracuse, N. Y. ABSTRACT. The proposed methodology of planning is a descrip- tion, explanation, and justification of the methods or techniques that a planner should use in preparing outdoor recreation development plans. The sequence of steps required is described. INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE In this paper, public outdoor recreation development planning is defined as a ra- UTDOOR RECREATION planning tional and systematic process, integrated 0 is a broad and complex activity. This with all the important social and physical paper deals with one aspect of that factors, for determining appropriate action activity: development planning - that is, in developing the natural resource to pro- planning of the natural resource base to vide outdoor recreational opportunities.* change its potential capacity for providing recreational opportunities. The primary The guidelines were developed from orientation is toward providing guidelines several sources. General planning theory, for planning an individual outdoor recrea- methodology, methods, and techniques for tion area or complex such as a state, county, various kinds of planning (e.g., urban, en- or regional
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Commission Handbook
    Routt County Planning Department Box 773749 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 970-879-2704 Routt County Planning Commission Handbook March, 2015 PI2014-007 Introduction Welcome to the Planning Commission The Planning Commission is one of the most This handbook will help you understand the legal visible groups responsible for planning in and policy framework for planning. It will also unincorporated Routt County including the provide you with a reference for the powers and communities of Milner, Phippsburg, Toponas and duties of the planning commission. As a planning Hahns Peak. commissioner you must have some understanding of the following topics: The Planning Commission is an appointed board of residents with commissioners selected from 1. Comprehensive planning. four different districts and four municipalities in 2. Zoning and platting. Routt County (North Routt – District 1, Land 3. How the planning commission operates and around Steamboat Springs – District 2, West the role and responsibilities of each individual Routt - District 3, and South Routt – District 4, the member. Towns of Yampa, Hayden, Oak Creek, and the City 4. The authority and duties of the commission. of Steamboat Springs) established as an advisory 5. Legal aspects of commission conduct. group for the Board of County Commissioners on 6. Standards for commission decision-making. planning matters and to perform other duties authorized by state statute. Even though you may This Planning Commission Handbook covers all of have been appointed from a certain area, your these topics and you will be given copies of the job is to represent the whole community. The Routt County Zoning and Subdivision Regulations Planning Commission’s principle responsibility is and the Routt County Master Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Planning and Management Guidelines for Transportation Agencies
    331 NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM REPORT 33I STRATEGIC PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES FOR TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1990 OFFICERS Chairman: Wayne Muri, Chief Engineer, Missouri Highway & Transportation Department Vice Chairman: C. Michael Walton, Bess Harris Jones Centennial Professor and Chairman, College of Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin Executive Director: Thomas B. Deen, Transportation Research Board MEMBERS JAMES B. BUSEY IV, Federal Aviation Administrator, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) GILBERT E. CARMICHAEL, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S. Department of Transportation. (ex officio) BRIAN W. CLYMER, Urban Mass Transportation Administrator, US. Department of Transportation (ex officio) JERRY R. CURRY, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, US. Department of Transportation (ex officio) FRANCIS B. FRANCOIS, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (ex officio) JOHN GRAY, President, Notional Asphalt Pavement Association (ex officio) THOMAS H. HANNA, President and Chief Executive Officer, Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the United States, Inc. (ex officio) HENRY J. HATCH, Chief of Engineers and Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ex officio) THOMAS D. LARSON, Federal Highway Administrator, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) GEORGE H. WAY, JR., Vice President for Research and Test Departments, Association
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Planning Basics for Managers
    STRATEGIC PLANNING Guide for Managers 1 Strategic Planning Basics for Managers In all UN offices, departments and missions, it is critical that managers utilize the most effective approach toward developing a strategy for their existing programmes and when creating new programmes. Managers use the strategy to communicate the direction to staff members and guide the larger department or office work. Here you will find practical techniques based on global management best practices. Strategic planning defined Strategic planning is a process of looking into the future and identifying trends and issues against which to align organizational priorities of the Department or Office. Within the Departments and Offices, it means aligning a division, section, unit or team to a higher-level strategy. In the UN, strategy is often about achieving a goal in the most effective and efficient manner possible. For a few UN offices (and many organizations outside the UN), strategy is about achieving a mission comparatively better than another organization (i.e. competition). For everyone, strategic planning is about understanding the challenges, trends and issues; understanding who are the key beneficiaries or clients and what they need; and determining the most effective and efficient way possible to achieve the mandate. A good strategy drives focus, accountability, and results. How and where to apply strategic planning UN departments, offices, missions and programmes develop strategic plans to guide the delivery of an overall mandate and direct multiple streams of work. Sub-entities create compatible strategies depending on their size and operational focus. Smaller teams within a department/office or mission may not need to create strategies; there are, however, situations in which small and medium teams may need to think strategically, in which case the following best practices can help structure the thinking.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Gentrification
    ULI Community Catalyst Report NUMBER 5 Managing Gentrification UrbanUrban LandLand $ InstituteInstitute COVER: A Chicago greystone; Julie Jaidenger/UIC City Design Center. ULI Community Catalyst Report NUMBER 5 Managing Gentrification The 2006 ULI/Charles H. Shaw Forum on Urban Community Issues September 21–22, 2006 Prepared by Deborah L. Myerson Urban Land $ Institute ULI Community Catalyst Report ABOUT ULI–the Urban Land Institute ULI PROJECT STAFF The mission of the Urban Land Institute is to provide leadership in Maureen McAvey the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving Executive Vice President, Initiatives communities worldwide. ULI is committed to: Michael Pawlukiewicz • Bringing together leaders from across the fields of real estate and land use policy to exchange best practices and serve community Director, Environment and needs; Sustainable Development • Fostering collaboration within and beyond ULI’s membership Deborah L. Myerson through mentoring, dialogue, and problem solving; Consultant to ULI • Exploring issues of urbanization, conservation, regeneration, land Samara Wolf use, capital formation, and sustainable development; Manager, Meetings and Events • Advancing land use policies and design practices that respect the uniqueness of both built and natural environments; Nancy H. Stewart Director, Book Program • Sharing knowledge through education, applied research, publish- ing, and electronic media; and Laura Glassman, Publications • Sustaining a diverse global network of local practice and advisory
    [Show full text]
  • A Cognitive Model of Planning*
    COGNITIVE SCIENCE 3, 275-310 (1979) A Cognitive Model of Planning* BARBARA HAYES-ROTH AND FREDERICK HAYES-ROTH The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California This paper presents a cognitive model of the planning process. The model gener- alizes the theoretical architecture of the Hearsay-II system. Thus, it assumes that planning comprises the activities of a variety of cognitive "specialists." Each specialist can suggest certain kinds of decisions for incorporation into the plan in progress, These include decisions about: (a) how to approach the planning problem; (b) what knowledge bears on the problem; (c) what kinds of actions to try to plan; (d) what specific actions to plan; and (e) how to allocate cognitive resources during planning, Within each of these categories, different specialists suggest decisions at different levels of abstraction. The activities of the various specialists are not coordinated in any systematic way. Instead, the specialists operate opportunistically, suggesting decisions whenever promising opportunities arise. The paper presents a detailed account of the model and illustrates its assumptions with a "thinking aloud" protocol. It also describes the performance of a computer simulation of the model. The paper contrasts the proposed model with successive refinement models and attempts to resolve apparent differences between the two points of view. 1. INTRODUCTION Planning is a familiar cognitive activity. We all have many opportunities to decide how we will behave in future situations. For example, we plan how to get to work in the morning, where and with whom to eat lunch, and how to spend our evenings. We also make longer-term plans, such as what to do on our vacations, how to celebrate Christmas, and what career path to follow.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning with Brain-Inspired AI Naoya Arakawa the Whole Brain Architecture Initiative [email protected] Abstract
    Planning with Brain-inspired AI Naoya Arakawa The Whole Brain Architecture Initiative [email protected] Abstract This article surveys engineering and neuroscientific models of planning as a cognitive function, which is regarded as a typical function of fluid intelligence in the discussion of general intelligence. It aims to present existing planning models as references for realizing the planning function in brain-inspired AI or artificial general intelligence (AGI). It also proposes themes for the research and development of brain-inspired AI from the viewpoint of tasks and architecture. Introduction This article surveys engineering and neuroscientific models of planning as a cognitive function. It aims to present existing planning models as references for realizing the planning function in brain-inspired AI or artificial general intelligence (AGI). It also proposes themes for the research and development of brain-inspired AI from the viewpoint of tasks and architecture. This survey may develop into specific requests for research. Planning is an important cognitive function for general intelligence in that it solves problems on the fly without new learning. In psychological discussions of general intelligence, planning is regarded as a typical function of fluid intelligence. In engineering, planning has been studied since the dawn of AI. While there are solutions for symbolically formulated tasks, solving problems in the real world is still difficult. Regarding non-human animals, Caledonian crows, for example, are known to solve planning tasks, and other animals may plan in order to survive in the wild. In the mammalian brain, the prefrontal cortex (PFC) is known to be involved in planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Philosophy
    Planning Philosophy Planning pyramid Accreditation Standard I A 3: The institution’s programs and services are aligned with its mission, and wheth- er the mission directs institutional priorities in meeting the educational needs of students. Standard I B 5: The institution assesses accom- plishment of its mission through program review and evaluation of goals and objectives, student learning outcomes, and student achievement. Quantitative and qualitative data are disaggre- gated for analysis by program type and mode of delivery. Standard I B 9 : The institution engages in con- tinuous, broad based, systematic evaluation and planning. The institution integrates program Planning questions review, planning, and resource allocation into a comprehensive process that leads to accom- plishment of its mission and improvement of institutional effectiveness and academic quality. Institutional planning addresses short- and long- range needs for educational programs and ser- vices and for human, physical, technology, and financial resources. Planning process Identified through mission, strategic goals and priorities. Additional short term goals may be identified through local outcomes assessment 1. identifies the goals or objectives to be achieved, Developing specific action plans with timelines and identified responsibility 2. formulates strategies to achieve them, Identifying and committing required resources 3. arranges or creates the means required, and Directing and allocating human, financial and 4. implements, directs, and monitors all steps in their proper sequence. physical resources required. Monitoring progress. Planning Priorities Improve Student Experience and Student Success Example Projects This priority covers initiatives that can be used to increase student retention, engage- ment and ultimately success at the course and program level. The student experience Update online registration Improve Tutoring facilities covers everything from application, registration, counselling, enrollment, scheduling to student support and ultimately graduation.
    [Show full text]
  • Reflecting on the Legacy of Kevin Lynch's Cognitive Approach to City
    Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture 12 (2018) 778-797 D doi: 10.17265/1934-7359/2018.11.002 DAVID PUBLISHING Reflecting on the Legacy of Kevin Lynch’s Cognitive Approach to City Design through Italian Didactic Experiences Elena Marchigiani1 and Claudia Mattogno2 1. Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Trieste, Trieste 34127, Italy 2. Department of Civil, Building and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome 00184, Italy Abstract: In Italy, the writings of Kevin Lynch (1918-1984) have had great influence. However, if The Image of the City (1960, trans. 1964) enjoyed a prolonged success, other texts attracted a fluctuating attention. The reasons for this variable interest help reflect on the current usability of Lynch’s lesson: the relevance given to social perception; the need to give voice to citizens’ needs; a performance approach to the project as a participatory process. The ability to stimulate a reflective attitude explains why, in Italy, Lynch’s legacy has found its major expression in teaching. Recent experiences at the Universities of Rome and Trieste – also suggested by the Lynch’s centennial – show how his texts still constitute a reference to approach urban analysis and design, being completely involved in the physical perception of the places and listening to the inhabitants’ stories. Didactic activities highlight further exploitation of Lynch’s theory in terms of: the importance of learning by interaction; a better understanding of urban space and social practices; the drawing of projects from mental maps. Nonetheless, when working in the historical parts of Italian cities, the character and uses of urban spaces urge us to adjust Lynch’s categories, thus, in fact, confirming their critical capacity and timeliness.
    [Show full text]