Model identification in interactive influence diagrams using mutual information

Web Intelligence and Agent Systems

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 313-327

  Zeng, Yifeng ^a   Doshi, Prashant ^b  

^a AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^b University of Georgia   (United States)

Author keywords

bayesian learning; Influence diagrams; mutual information; opponent modeling

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN LEARNING; BEHAVIORAL MODEL; DECISION-MAKING PROBLEM; EMPIRICAL RESULTS; INFLUENCE DIAGRAM; MODEL IDENTIFICATION; MODEL SPACES; MULTI-AGENT SETTING; MUTUAL INFORMATIONS; OPPONENT MODELING; OPTIMAL DECISIONS; REPEATED GAMES;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS; DECISION MAKING;

GRAPHIC METHODS;

EID: 77954925198     PISSN: 15701263     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/WIA-2010-0194     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. N. Bard and M. Bowling. Particle filtering for dynamic agent modelling in simplified poker. In Proceedings of the Twenty- Second Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 515-521, 2007.
2. C. Camerer. Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Princeton University Press, 2003.
3. D. Carmel and S. Markovich. Learning models of intelligent agents. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 62-67, 1996.
4. T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas. Elements of Information Theory. Wiley-Interscience, 2006.
5. J. L. Doob. Stochastic Processes. John Wiley and Sons, 1953.
6. P. Doshi and P. J. Gmytrasiewicz. On the difficulty of achieving equilibrium in interactive pomdps. In Twenty First Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pages 1131-1136, Boston, MA, 2006.
7. P. Doshi, Y. Zeng, and Q. Chen. Graphical models for interactive pomdps: Representations and solutions. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (JAAMAS), 18(3):376-416, 2009.
8. D. Fudenberg and J. Tirole. Game Theory. MIT Press, 1991.
9. Y. Gal and A. Pfeffer. Networks of influence diagrams: A formalism for reasoning about agents' decision-making processes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR), 33:109-147, 2008.
10. P. J. Gmytrasiewicz, S. Noh, and T. Kellog. Bayesian update of recursive agent models. International Journal of User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 8(1-2):49-69, 1998.
11. H. Koen and T. Dmytro. Opponent modelling in automated multi-issue negotiation using bayesian learning. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pages 331-338, 2008.
12. D. Koller and B. Milch. Multi-agent influence diagrams for representing and solving games. In Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 1027-1034, 2001.
13. C.-L. Liu. Some theoretical properties of mutual information for student assessments in intelligent tutoring systems. In Intl. Symp. on Foundations of Intelligent Systems, 2005.
14. N. S. Madsen and F. V. Jensen. An influence diagram framework for acting under influence by agents with unknown goals. In Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Probabilistic Graphical Models (PGM), pages 289-296, 2008.
15. C. Mudgal and J. Vassileva. An influence diagram model for multi-agent negotiation. In International Conference on Multi- Agent Systems (ICMAS), pages 451-452, 2000.
16. J. D. Rennie. Improving multi-text classification using naive bayes. Technical Report AI TR 2001-2004, MIT, 2001.
17. S. Saha, A. Biswas, and S. Sen. Modeling opponent decision in repeated one-shot negotiations. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pages 397-403, 2005.
18. R. D. Shachter. Evaluating influence diagrams. Operations Research, 34(6):871-882, 1986.
19. N. Sturtevant and M. Bowling. Robust game play against unknown opponents. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pages 713-719, 2006.
20. D. Suryadi and P. Gmytrasiewicz. Learning models of other agents using influence diagrams. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on User Modeling (UM), pages 223- 232, 1999.
21. J. A. Tatman and R. D. Shachter. Dynamic programming and influence diagrams. IEEE Transaction on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 20(2):365-379, 1990.
22. D. Zeng and K. Sycara. Bayesian learning in negotiation. International Journal of Human Computer Systems, 48:125-141, 1998.