# From Classical to Hierarchical: benchmarks for the HTN Track of the International Planning Competition

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.05481 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.05481/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 1 of its 5 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Mar 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Hierarchical Planning in the IPC](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.04405/) (2019)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [HyperTensioN and Total-order Forward Decomposition optimizations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.00345/) (2022)
- [MultiZenoTravel: a Tunable Benchmark for Multi-Objective Planning with Known Pareto Front](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14659/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In this short paper, we outline nine classical benchmarks submitted to the first hierarchical planning track of the International Planning competition in 2020. All of these benchmarks are based on the HDDL language. The choice of the benchmarks was based on a questionnaire sent to the HTN community. They are the following: Barman, Childsnack, Rover, Satellite, Blocksworld, Depots, Gripper, and Hiking. In the rest of the paper we give a short description of these benchmarks. All are totally ordered.