Decision-Making: A Neuroeconomic Perspective

This article introduces and discusses from a philosophical point of view the nascent field of neuroeconomics, which is the study of neural mechanisms involved in decision-making and their economic significance. Following a survey of the ways in which decision-making is usually construed in philosophy, economics and psychology, I review many important findings in neuroeconomics to show that they suggest a revised picture of decision-making and ourselves as choosing agents. Finally, I outline a neuroeconomic account of irrationality

Decision-Making: A Neuroeconomic Perspective

This article introduces and discusses from a philosophical point of view the nascent field of neuroeconomics, which is the study of neural mechanisms involved in decision-making and their economic significance. Following a survey of the ways in which decision-making is usually construed in philosophy, economics and psychology, I review many important findings in neuroeconomics to show that they suggest a revised picture of decision-making and ourselves as choosing agents. Finally, I outline a neuroeconomic account of irrationality.neuroeconomics; decision-making; rationality; ultimatum; philosophy; psychology

Strategies for balancing exploration and exploitation in electromagnetic optimisation

The paper focuses on the advantages and drawbacks of different strategies which may be used to assist kriging surrogate modelling with the purpose of selecting multiple design vectors for evaluation when stepping forward in optimisation routines. The combined criteria include the efficiency of finding the global optimum but also the quality of the approximation of the shape of the objective function; the latter may be used to make judgements about the robustness of the optimised design

Multi-step Reinforcement Learning: A Unifying Algorithm

Unifying seemingly disparate algorithmic ideas to produce better performing algorithms has been a longstanding goal in reinforcement learning. As a primary example, TD($\lambda$) elegantly unifies one-step TD prediction with Monte Carlo methods through the use of eligibility traces and the trace-decay parameter $\lambda$. Currently, there are a multitude of algorithms that can be used to perform TD control, including Sarsa, $Q$-learning, and Expected Sarsa. These methods are often studied in the one-step case, but they can be extended across multiple time steps to achieve better performance. Each of these algorithms is seemingly distinct, and no one dominates the others for all problems. In this paper, we study a new multi-step action-value algorithm called $Q(\sigma)$ which unifies and generalizes these existing algorithms, while subsuming them as special cases. A new parameter, $\sigma$, is introduced to allow the degree of sampling performed by the algorithm at each step during its backup to be continuously varied, with Sarsa existing at one extreme (full sampling), and Expected Sarsa existing at the other (pure expectation). $Q(\sigma)$ is generally applicable to both on- and off-policy learning, but in this work we focus on experiments in the on-policy case. Our results show that an intermediate value of $\sigma$, which results in a mixture of the existing algorithms, performs better than either extreme. The mixture can also be varied dynamically which can result in even greater performance.Comment: Appeared at the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-18