Exploiting model equivalences for solving interactive dynamic influence diagrams

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Volumn 43, Issue , 2012, Pages 211-255

  Zeng, Yifeng ^a   Doshi, Prashant ^b  

^a AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^b University of Georgia ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANDIDATE MODELS; EQUIVALENT MODEL; EXPONENTIAL GROWTH; GRAPHICAL MODEL; INDIVIDUAL MODELS; INFLUENCE DIAGRAM; LARGE SPACES; MODEL EQUIVALENCES; MODEL SPACES; MULTI-AGENT SETTING; PARTIALLY OBSERVABLE ENVIRONMENTS; PHYSICAL STATE; PREDICTIVE BEHAVIORS; SEQUENTIAL DECISION MAKING; TIME STEP; UPDATED MODEL;

EQUIVALENCE CLASSES; EXPERT SYSTEMS; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

MODELS;

EID: 84862644620     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10769757     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1613/jair.3461     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Andersen, S., & Jensen, F. (1989). Hugin: A shell for building belief universes for expert systems. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 332-337.
2. Aumann, R. J. (1999a). Interactive epistemology i: Knowledge. International Journal of Game Theory, 28(3), 263-300.
3. Aumann, R. J. (1999b). Interactive epistemology ii: Probability. International Journal of Game Theory, 28, 301-314.
4. Bernstein, D. S., Givan, R., Immerman, N., & Zilberstein, S. (2002). The complexity of decentralized control of markov decision processes. Mathematics of Operations Research, 27(4), 819-840.
5. Brandenburger, A., & Dekel, E. (1993). Hierarchies of beliefs and common knowledge. Journal of Economic Theory, 59, 189-198.
6. Casbeer, D., Beard, R., McLain, T., Sai-Ming, L., & Mehra, R. (2005). Forest fire monitoring with multiple small uavs. In American Control Conference, pp. 3530-3535. (Pubitemid 41196364)
7. Castro, P., Panangaden, P., & Precup, D. (2009). Equivalence relations in fully and partially observable markov decision processes. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1653-1658.
8. Chang, K.-C., & Fung, R. (1991). Refinement and coarsening of bayesian networks. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 435-445.
9. Dekel, E., Fudenberg, D., & Morris, S. (2006). Topologies on types. Theoretical Economics, 1, 275-309.
10. Doshi, P., & Sonu, E. (2010). Gatac: A scalable and realistic testbed for multiagent decision making). In Fifth Workshop on Multiagent Sequential Decision Making in Uncertain Domains (MSDM), AAMAS, pp. 62-66.
11. Andersen, S., & Jensen, F. (1989). Hugin: A shell for building belief universes for expert systems. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 332-337.
12. Aumann, R. J. (1999a). Interactive epistemology i: Knowledge. International Journal of Game Theory, 28(3), 263-300.
13. Aumann, R. J. (1999b). Interactive epistemology ii: Probability. International Journal of Game Theory, 28, 301-314.
14. Bernstein, D. S., Givan, R., Immerman, N., & Zilberstein, S. (2002). The complexity of decentralized control of markov decision processes. Mathematics of Operations Research, 27(4), 819-840.
15. Brandenburger, A., & Dekel, E. (1993). Hierarchies of beliefs and common knowledge. Journal of Economic Theory, 59, 189-198.
16. Casbeer, D., Beard, R., McLain, T., Sai-Ming, L., & Mehra, R. (2005). Forest fire monitoring with multiple small uavs. In American Control Conference, pp. 3530-3535. (Pubitemid 41196364)
17. Castro, P., Panangaden, P., & Precup, D. (2009). Equivalence relations in fully and partially observable markov decision processes. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1653-1658.
18. Chang, K.-C., & Fung, R. (1991). Refinement and coarsening of bayesian networks. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 435-445.
19. Dekel, E., Fudenberg, D., & Morris, S. (2006). Topologies on types. Theoretical Economics, 1, 275-309.
20. Doshi, P., & Sonu, E. (2010). Gatac: A scalable and realistic testbed for multiagent decision making). In Fifth Workshop on Multiagent Sequential Decision Making in Uncertain Domains (MSDM), AAMAS, pp. 62-66.
21. ZENG & DOSHI Doshi, P., Zeng, Y., & Chen, Q. (2009). Graphical models for interactive pomdps: Representations and solutions. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (JAAMAS), 18(3), 376-416.
22. Duong, Q., Wellman, M., & Singh, S. (2008). Knowledge combination in graphical multiagent models. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), pp. 153-160.
23. Duong, Q., Wellman, M., Singh, S., & Vorobeychik, Y. (2010). History-dependent graphical multiagent models. In International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 1215-1222.
24. Emery-Montemerlo, R., Gordon, G., Schneider, J., & Thrun, S. (2005). Game theoretic control for robot teams. In International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1163-1169. (Pubitemid 46083950)
25. Gal, Y., & Pfeffer, A. (2008). Networks of influence diagrams: A formalism for representing agents' beliefs and decision-making processes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 33, 109-147.
26. Givan, R., Dean, T., & Greig, M. (2003). Equivalence notions and model minimization in markov decision processes. Artificial Intelligence, 147(1-2), 163-223.
27. Gmytrasiewicz, P., & Doshi, P. (2005). A framework for sequential planning in multiagent settings. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR), 24, 49-79. (Pubitemid 43130932)
28. Harsanyi, J. C. (1967). Games with incomplete information played by bayesian players. Management Science, 14(3), 159-182.
29. Kaelbling, L., Littman, M., & Cassandra, A. (1998). Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 101, 99-134. (Pubitemid 128387390)
30. Kearns, M., Littman, M., & Singh, S. (2001). Graphical models for game theory. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), pp. 253-260.
31. Koller, D., & Milch, B. (2001). Multi-agent influence diagrams for representing and solving games. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 1027-1034.
32. Madsen, N. S., & Jensen, F. V. (2008). An influence diagram framework for acting under influence by agents with unknown goals. In Fourth European Workshop on Probabilistic Graphical Models (PGM), pp. 289-296.
33. Mertens, J., & Zamir, S. (1985). Formulation of bayesian analysis for games with incomplete information. International Journal of Game Theory, 14, 1-29.
34. Milner, R. (1980). A Calculus of Communicating Systems. Springer-Verlag.
35. Murphy, D., & Cycon, J. (1998). Applications for mini vtol uav for law enforcement. In SPIE 3577:Sensors, C3I, Information, and Training Technologies for Law Enforcement.
36. Nair, R., Tambe,M., Yokoo,M., Pynadath, D., &Marsella, S. (2003). Taming decentralized pomdps : Towards efficient policy computation for multiagent settings. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 705-711.
37. Nilsson, D., & Lauritzen, S. (2000). Evaluating influence diagrams using limids. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), pp. 436-445.
38. Oliehoek, F. A.,Whiteson, S., & Spaan,M. T. J. (2009). Lossless clustering of histories in decentralized pomdps. In International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 577-584.
39. Perry, A. R. (2004). The flightgear flight simulator. In UseLinux.
40. Pineau, J., Gordon, G., & Thrun, S. (2006). Anytime point-based approximations for large pomdps. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR), 27, 335-380.
41. Pynadath, D., & Marsella, S. (2007). Minimal mental models. In Twenty-Second Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 1038-1044, Vancouver, Canada. (Pubitemid 350149706)
42. Rathnasabapathy, B., Doshi, P.,&Gmytrasiewicz, P. J. (2006). Exact solutions to interactive pomdps using behavioral equivalence. In Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agents Systems Conference (AAMAS), pp. 1025-1032. (Pubitemid 46609591)
43. Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (Third Edition). Prentice Hall.
44. Seuken, S., & Zilberstein, S. (2007). Memory-bounded dynamic programming for dec-pomdps. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp. 2009-2015.
45. Seuken, S., & Zilberstein, S. (2008). Formal models and algorithms for decentralized decision making under uncertainty. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 17(2), 190-250.
46. Smallwood, R., & Sondik, E. (1973). The optimal control of partially observable markov decision processes over a finite horizon. Operations Research (OR), 21, 1071-1088.
47. Suryadi, D., & Gmytrasiewicz, P. (1999). Learning models of other agents using influence diagrams. In International Conference on User Modeling, pp. 223-232.
48. Tatman, J. A., & Shachter, R. D. (1990). Dynamic programming and influence diagrams. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 20(2), 365-379.
49. Witwicki, S. J., & Durfee, E. H. (2010). Influence-based policy abstraction for weakly-coupled dec-pomdps. In International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS), pp. 185-192.
50. Yuan, C., Wu, X., & Hansen, E. (2010). Solving multistage influence diagrams using branch-andbound search. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), pp. 691-700.
51. Zeng, Y., Doshi, P., & Chen, Q. (2007). Approximate solutions of interactive dynamic influence diagrams using model clustering. In Twenty Second Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 782-787. (Pubitemid 350149665)