Agents: Rationality (2)



Similar documents
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence. Intelligent Agents

Chapter 2: Intelligent Agents

Chapter 2 Intelligent Agents

Artificial Intelligence

Measuring the Performance of an Agent

Intelligent Agents. Chapter 2. Chapter 2 1

cs171 HW 1 - Solutions

Course Outline Department of Computing Science Faculty of Science. COMP Applied Artificial Intelligence (3,1,0) Fall 2015

A Review of Intelligent Agents

Intelligent Agents. Based on An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems and slides by Michael Wooldridge

Improving proposal evaluation process with the help of vendor performance feedback and stochastic optimal control

A Client-Server Interactive Tool for Integrated Artificial Intelligence Curriculum

Fundamentals of Decision Theory

CSC384 Intro to Artificial Intelligence

Introduction to Artificial Intelligence

6.231 Dynamic Programming and Stochastic Control Fall 2008

Laboratory work in AI: First steps in Poker Playing Agents and Opponent Modeling

Artificial Intelligence and Politecnico di Milano. Presented by Matteo Matteucci

(Refer Slide Time: 01:52)

Integrating Cognitive Models Based on Different Computational Methods

What is Artificial Intelligence?

Lecture 1: Introduction to Reinforcement Learning

Cloud Computing for Agent-based Traffic Management Systems

AIBO as an Intelligent Robot Watchdog

Mapping an Application to a Control Architecture: Specification of the Problem

Eastern Washington University Department of Computer Science. Questionnaire for Prospective Masters in Computer Science Students

Autonomous Operations for Small, Low-Cost Missions: SME, EOR (STEDI), DATA, and Pluto Express OUTLINE. Visions for Future, Low-Cost Missions

Curriculum Map. Discipline: Computer Science Course: C++

Chapter 1: Scope of Thesis

Distributed Database for Environmental Data Integration

Graduate Co-op Students Information Manual. Department of Computer Science. Faculty of Science. University of Regina

Part I: Decision Support Systems

Unit 4 DECISION ANALYSIS. Lesson 37. Decision Theory and Decision Trees. Learning objectives:

Simulating the Structural Evolution of Software

Basic Data Analysis. Stephen Turnbull Business Administration and Public Policy Lecture 12: June 22, Abstract. Review session.

Executive Summary: Navigant Research Leaderboard Report: Smart City Suppliers

Web application security: automated scanning versus manual penetration testing.

About the Author. The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Software Engineering. Brief History of AI. Introduction 2/27/2013

Appendices master s degree programme Artificial Intelligence

Predictive Act-R (PACT-R)

SYSTEMS, CONTROL AND MECHATRONICS

Human & Hardware in the Loop Simulator

Software Engineering. What is a system?

IMPROVING RESOURCE LEVELING IN AGILE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THROUGH AGENT-BASED APPROACH

A successful market segmentation initiative answers the following critical business questions: * How can we a. Customer Status.

Safe robot motion planning in dynamic, uncertain environments

Advanced Operating Systems (M) Dr Colin Perkins School of Computing Science University of Glasgow

Proposal 1: Model-Based Control Method for Discrete-Parts machining processes

Proceedings of the 9th WSEAS International Conference on APPLIED COMPUTER SCIENCE

Set-Based Design: A Decision-Theoretic Perspective

Theoretical Perspective

Technology and Trends for Smarter Business Analytics

Analysis of Bayesian Dynamic Linear Models

Test Coverage Criteria for Autonomous Mobile Systems based on Coloured Petri Nets

How cloud-based systems and machine-driven big data can contribute to the development of autonomous vehicles

The Planning and Execution Assistant and Trainer (PEAT) The challenge of impaired executive functions

Model-based Synthesis. Tony O Hagan

Sharing Online Advertising Revenue with Consumers

A SURVEY ON GENETIC ALGORITHM FOR INTRUSION DETECTION SYSTEM

Formal Verification and Linear-time Model Checking

Intelligent Flexible Automation

Reinforcement Learning

Cloud Enabled Emergency Navigation Using Faster-than-real-time Simulation

System modeling. Budapest University of Technology and Economics Department of Measurement and Information Systems

A Time Efficient Algorithm for Web Log Analysis

Teaching Introductory Artificial Intelligence with Pac-Man

ACH 1.1 : A Tool for Analyzing Competing Hypotheses Technical Description for Version 1.1

Extending Data Processing Capabilities of Relational Database Management Systems.

Unit I. Introduction

APP INVENTOR. Test Review

Information Visualization WS 2013/14 11 Visual Analytics

Designing Behavior-Based Systems

Frequency, definition Modifiability, existence of multiple operations & strategies

An Available-to-Promise Production-Inventory. An ATP System with Pseudo Orders

Collective Information Practice: Exploring Privacy and Security as Social and Cultural Phenomena

MECE 102 Mechatronics Engineering Orientation

Network Security A Decision and Game-Theoretic Approach

Transcription:

Agents: Intro Agent is entity that perceives and acts Perception occurs via sensors Percept is one unit of sensory input Percept sequence is complete history of agent s percepts In general, agent s actions are based only on what has been perceived If agent receives no percepts, will not be able to adapt to environment Action accomplished via effectors/actuators Agent is a function that maps percept sequences to actions Mapping can be thought of in two general ways: 1. A lookup table indexed by percept sequences (external representation) 2. Algorithmically, generating an action given a percept sequence as input (internal representation) Implemented in terms of an agent program 1

Agents: Rationality Concerned with the construction of intelligent (rational) agents Rational agent is agent that does the right thing Need objective measures of what is right and how successful the agent is in achieving it Performance measure: a criterion for success Used to evaluate environmental states that result from agent s actions Must differentiate between an agent s internal state and the state of the environment Criteria for performance measures: Should be objective Should be defined by outside agency Must be careful what is being measured Must be careful when it is measured Success should be an average of performance over an extended period Rationality depends on 1. Percept sequence 2. Knowledge about its environment 3. Set of available actions 4. Agent s percept sequence Rational agent: For each possible percept sequence, a rational agent should perform whatever action is expected to maximize its performance measure for each possible percept sequence on the basis of the evidence provided by its percept sequence and whatever built-in knowledge it has available. Rationality is not the same as omniscience Omniscience means maximizing actual results of actions Rationality means maximizing expected results of actions Information gathering: Retrieving info from the environment (via actions) to help maiximize performance 2

Agents: Rationality (2) Want autonomous agent Autonomous agent can act on its own under its own control Implies that the agent must be able to learn through its percepts Autonomy does not preclude a priori knowledge, but it does preclude a priori knowledge exclusively If agent operates exclusively on a priori knowledge, it will not be able to adapt to novel situations 3

Agents: Environments Task environment describes problem that agent solves Consists of 1. Performance measure 2. Environment 3. Actuators 4. Sensors Called the PEAS description Interacts with the environment Internal state constructed exclusively from percepts Environments can be described in terms of the following characteristics 1. Fully observable v partially observable Fully observable environment is one in which agent can perceive its complete state (those aspects relevant to agent s actions) No need to maintain an internal state of such an environment in order to keep track of it 2. Single agent v multi agent The difference lies in whether other entities in the environment have performance measures that depend on the agent s behavior If they do, the environment is multi agent Competitive environment is one in which one agent maximizes its performance measure to the detriment of another agent s performance measure Cooperative environment is one in which maximization of one agent s performance measure helps maximize another agent s performance measure 4

3. Deterministic v stochastic Agents: Environments (2) In deterministic environment, next state is determined solely by current state and action of the agent No need to worry about uncertainty Uncertain environment is one that is not fully observable or not deterministic Nondeterministic environment is one in which actions characterized by possible outcomes but have no probabilities associated with the outcomes Such environments usually require agent to search through all possible outcomes of actions (exhaustive search) 4. Episodic v sequential Episode is a single action independent of others, based on a single percept In episodic environment results of one episode do not affect other episodes Agent does not need to plan ahead (wrt episodes) Sequential environment is one in which an action (may) influence future actions 5. Static v dynamic Static environment is changed only by the agent s actions It does not evolve independently of the agent The agent can take its time making decisions and not need to worry about the world evolving as it deliberates Semidynamic environment is one that is static but where the performance measure is time-dependent 6. Discrete v continuous Difference based on (a) Environment state (b) How time is handled (c) Percepts (d) Actions Discrete environment is one in which only a distinct number of each of the above exist 5

7. Known v unknown Agents: Environments (3) This applies the the agent s internal state model An unknown environment is one in which the agent does not know the rules of play Unknown does not mean partially observable The most difficult environment is partially observable, multiagent, stochastic, sequential, dynamic, continuous, and unknown This describes most real-world problems Environment simulator program: procedure Run-Environment (state, Update-Function, agents, termination) { input: state //description of initial world state //this distinct from agent s state and //inaccessible to agent Update-Function //modifies environment agents termination //predicate for termination } repeat for each agent do Percept(agent) <- Get-Percept(agent, state) for each agent do Action(agent) <- Program(agent)(Percept(agent)) state <- Update-Function(actions, agents, state) until termination(state) Most agents designed to work in an environment class - set of environments Must evaluate agent s performance in a variety of environments If it only performs in one, it may take advantage of the environment s weaknesses and so performance measure is biased 6

Agents: Agent Programs Goal of recent AI is to construct agent programs - the programs that map percept sequences to actions To design such a program, need to establish the platform on which it will run An agent consists of a program and an architecture To design the platform, need to know things like 1. Types of percepts needed (or available) 2. Actions needed (or available) 3. Goals and performance measures 4. Environment The above is referred to as a PAGE description These implemented in terms of 1. Sensors (physical or soft) 2. Effectors (physical or soft) 3. Computing architecture 4. The program itself Basic agent structure (function): function BasicAgent (percept) returns action { static memory } memory <- UpdateMemory(memory, percept) action <- ChooseBestAction(memory) memory <- UpdateMemory(memory, action) return action 7

Agents: Types - Table-driven Agents Simplest agent program Agent program: function Table-Driven-Agent (percept) returns action { static perceptsequence //a sequence, initially empty table //indexed by percept sequences } append(percept, perceptsequence) action <- Lookup(perceptSequence, table) return action Issues: 1. Size of table 2. Construction of table Must be exhaustive Time involved 3. Not autonomous Cannot adapt to novel situations Above arguments are for use of a lookup program exclusively There is nothing to preclude table loolup as part or in conjunction with another approach 8

Agents: Types - Simple Reflex Agents Stucture: Agent program: function Simple-Reflex-Agent (percept) returns action { static rules } state <- Interpret-Input(percept) rule <- Rule-Match(state, rules) action <- rule.action return action Agent does not maintain an evolving representation of the world State is a representation based on current percept - a snapshot There is no memory Each action based solely on current percept Uses a specialized lookup table (rules) for situations that require no significant deliberation 9

Agents: Types - Simple Reflex Agents (2) Individual rules take the form of if-then statements Referred to as Issues: Condition-action rules Situation-action rules If-then rules Productions 1. No internal representation of the world Cannot make predictions about how the world may change Cannot plan sequences of actions Cannot base decisions on time-varying data 2. Prone to infinite loops in partially-obeservable environments Can be avoided by incorporating randomness when choose rules 10

Agents: Types - Model-based Reflex Agents Stucture: Agent program: function Model-based-Reflex-Agent (percept) returns action { static state //description of current world state model //state of world as result of action after applied to cu rules action //most recent action } state <- Update-State(state, action, percept, model) rule <- Rule-Match(state, rules) action <- rule.action Uses a specialized lookup table (rules) for situations that require no significant deliberation 11

Assumes evolving world Changes my result from Agent s actions External forces Agents: Types - Model-based Reflex Agents (2) Cannot assume complete knowledge about the world Sensors cannot monitor all aspects of the world Agent will utilize knowledge about how the world works 1. Knowledge re how the agent s actions affect the world 2. Knowledge about how the world evolves Issues: 1. No mechanism for making decisions Cannot decide among several alternative actions 12

Agents: Types - Goal-based Agents Stucture: Incorporation of goals allows agent to use them to decide among conflicting actions In reflexive agents, no reasoning is involved If a rule s conditions are met, the action is carried out Must be able to predict results of actions Use these results to determine which action takes agent closer to goal Incorporates search and planning Issues: 1. Slower than reflexive agents Must reason about effects of actions 13

More flexible than reflexive agents Agents: Types - Goal-based Agents (2) When a novel situations arises, a goal-based agent can reason about the effects In reflexive case, would need to modify rule base to account for the novel situation Can work with a variety of goals In reflexive case, would need to modify rule base to accomodate new goals 14

Agents: Types - Utility-based Agents Stucture: Goal-based agents lack a happiness factor There are usually many paths (sequences of actions) that can lead to a goal There should be some measure of the desireability of states that the agent passes through on its path to a goal Desireability might be measured in terms of Efficiency Cost (energy, damage, etc.) Directness 15

Agents: Types - Utility-based Agents (2) Utility measures the desireability of a state Utility function maps a state to a number Can be used in several ways: 1. To select from among conflicting goals Allows intelligent decision making with respct to tradeoffs 2. In uncertain environments, allows intelligent choices based on the likelihood of success Utility-based agent may need to compare the utilities that arise from different courses of action Goal-based agent will simply select an action if it achieves a goal Since world is generally an uncertain place, agent will choose action that maximizes expected utility Based on the probablities and utilities associated with outcomes of actions 16

To create a rational agent Agents: Types - Learning Agents 1. Could program all aspects of intelligence re a given environment by hand Not practical 2. Could incorporate a learning component and basic knowledge, and let the agent learn Stucture: Reduces amount of programming involved Makes a more flexible agent 17

Learning agent has four components 1. Learning element Agents: Types - Learning Agents (2) Responsible for making improvements Can alter any of the data structures (state info) of the agent 2. Performance element Embodies the agent program 3. Critic Evaluates agent s performance Passes recommendations to the learning element 4. Problem generator Suggests actions that will force the agent to explore Purpose is to force agent to continue learning in hopes of improving performance Otherwise the agent would continue performing actions that had known success Performance standard Should be fixed and external to the agent Want the agent s performance to be based on an absolute standard and not based on the agent s internal perception of its performance It may (partially) interpret some percepts as rewards or punishments to be used as feedback 18

Agents: Agent Program State Structure Internal state can be represented in three general ways 1. Atomic State represented as an atomic value Has no internal structure 2. Factored State consists of a set of variables that represent attributes of the environment Each has a value Allows representation of uncertainty (associated with each attribute) Attributes may be common to several states 3. Structured Includes relationships among the attributes 19