689,591 research outputs found
KEMNAD: A Knowledge Engineering Methodology for Negotiating Agent Development
Automated negotiation is widely applied in various domains. However, the development of such systems is a complex knowledge and software engineering task. So, a methodology there will be helpful. Unfortunately, none of existing methodologies can offer sufficient, detailed support for such system development. To remove this limitation, this paper develops a new methodology made up of: (1) a generic framework (architectural pattern) for the main task, and (2) a library of modular and reusable design pattern (templates) of subtasks. Thus, it is much easier to build a negotiating agent by assembling these standardised components rather than reinventing the wheel each time. Moreover, since these patterns are identified from a wide variety of existing negotiating agents(especially high impact ones), they can also improve the quality of the final systems developed. In addition, our methodology reveals what types of domain knowledge need to be input into the negotiating agents. This in turn provides a basis for developing techniques to acquire the domain knowledge from human users. This is important because negotiation agents act faithfully on the behalf of their human users and thus the relevant domain knowledge must be acquired from the human users. Finally, our methodology is validated with one high impact system
Hybridization of Bayesian networks and belief functions to assess risk. Application to aircraft deconstruction
This paper aims to present a study on knowledge management for the disassembly of end-of-life aircraft. We propose a model using Bayesian networks to assess risk and present three approaches to integrate the belief functions standing for the representation of fuzzy and uncertain knowledge
Perseus: Randomized Point-based Value Iteration for POMDPs
Partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) form an attractive
and principled framework for agent planning under uncertainty. Point-based
approximate techniques for POMDPs compute a policy based on a finite set of
points collected in advance from the agents belief space. We present a
randomized point-based value iteration algorithm called Perseus. The algorithm
performs approximate value backup stages, ensuring that in each backup stage
the value of each point in the belief set is improved; the key observation is
that a single backup may improve the value of many belief points. Contrary to
other point-based methods, Perseus backs up only a (randomly selected) subset
of points in the belief set, sufficient for improving the value of each belief
point in the set. We show how the same idea can be extended to dealing with
continuous action spaces. Experimental results show the potential of Perseus in
large scale POMDP problems
Belief gambles in epistemic decision theory
Don’t form beliefs on the basis of coin flips or random guesses. More generally, don’t take belief gambles: if a proposition is no more likely to be true than false given your total body of evidence, don’t go ahead and believe that proposition. Few would deny this seemingly innocuous piece of epistemic advice. But what, exactly, is wrong with taking belief gambles? Philosophers have debated versions of this question at least since the classic dispute between William Clifford and William James near the end of the nineteenth century. Here I reassess the normative standing of belief gambles from the perspective of epistemic decision theory. The main lesson of the paper is a negative one: it turns out that we need to make some surprisingly strong and hard-to-motivate assumptions to establish a general norm against belief gambles within a decision-theoretic framework. I take this to pose a dilemma for epistemic decision theory: it forces us to either make seemingly unmotivated assumptions to secure a norm against belief gambles, or concede that belief gambles can be rational after all
Active Sensing as Bayes-Optimal Sequential Decision Making
Sensory inference under conditions of uncertainty is a major problem in both
machine learning and computational neuroscience. An important but poorly
understood aspect of sensory processing is the role of active sensing. Here, we
present a Bayes-optimal inference and control framework for active sensing,
C-DAC (Context-Dependent Active Controller). Unlike previously proposed
algorithms that optimize abstract statistical objectives such as information
maximization (Infomax) [Butko & Movellan, 2010] or one-step look-ahead accuracy
[Najemnik & Geisler, 2005], our active sensing model directly minimizes a
combination of behavioral costs, such as temporal delay, response error, and
effort. We simulate these algorithms on a simple visual search task to
illustrate scenarios in which context-sensitivity is particularly beneficial
and optimization with respect to generic statistical objectives particularly
inadequate. Motivated by the geometric properties of the C-DAC policy, we
present both parametric and non-parametric approximations, which retain
context-sensitivity while significantly reducing computational complexity.
These approximations enable us to investigate the more complex problem
involving peripheral vision, and we notice that the difference between C-DAC
and statistical policies becomes even more evident in this scenario.Comment: Scheduled to appear in UAI 201
Decision-Making with Belief Functions: a Review
Approaches to decision-making under uncertainty in the belief function
framework are reviewed. Most methods are shown to blend criteria for decision
under ignorance with the maximum expected utility principle of Bayesian
decision theory. A distinction is made between methods that construct a
complete preference relation among acts, and those that allow incomparability
of some acts due to lack of information. Methods developed in the imprecise
probability framework are applicable in the Dempster-Shafer context and are
also reviewed. Shafer's constructive decision theory, which substitutes the
notion of goal for that of utility, is described and contrasted with other
approaches. The paper ends by pointing out the need to carry out deeper
investigation of fundamental issues related to decision-making with belief
functions and to assess the descriptive, normative and prescriptive values of
the different approaches
A canonical theory of dynamic decision-making
Decision-making behavior is studied in many very different fields, from medicine and eco- nomics to psychology and neuroscience, with major contributions from mathematics and statistics, computer science, AI, and other technical disciplines. However the conceptual- ization of what decision-making is and methods for studying it vary greatly and this has resulted in fragmentation of the field. A theory that can accommodate various perspectives may facilitate interdisciplinary working. We present such a theory in which decision-making is articulated as a set of canonical functions that are sufficiently general to accommodate diverse viewpoints, yet sufficiently precise that they can be instantiated in different ways for specific theoretical or practical purposes. The canons cover the whole decision cycle, from the framing of a decision based on the goals, beliefs, and background knowledge of the decision-maker to the formulation of decision options, establishing preferences over them, and making commitments. Commitments can lead to the initiation of new decisions and any step in the cycle can incorporate reasoning about previous decisions and the rationales for them, and lead to revising or abandoning existing commitments. The theory situates decision-making with respect to other high-level cognitive capabilities like problem solving, planning, and collaborative decision-making. The canonical approach is assessed in three domains: cognitive and neuropsychology, artificial intelligence, and decision engineering
- …