MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924816077 · doi:10.1613/jair.1.11418

Modeling and Planning with Macro-Actions in Decentralized POMDPs

2019· article· en· W2924816077 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Amato, George Konidaris, Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Jonathan P. How

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNational Institute of Mental HealthMultidisciplinary University Research InitiativeAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer sciencePartially observable Markov decision processMacroMarkov decision processExploitAction (physics)Class (philosophy)Mathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceMarkov chainMarkov processMarkov modelMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decentralized partially observable Markov decision processes (Dec-POMDPs) are general models for decentralized multi-agent decision making under uncertainty. However, they typically model a problem at a low level of granularity, where each agent's actions are primitive operations lasting exactly one time step. We address the case where each agent has macro-actions: temporally extended actions that may require different amounts of time to execute. We model macro-actions as options in a Dec-POMDP, focusing on actions that depend only on information directly available to the agent during execution. Therefore, we model systems where coordination decisions only occur at the level of deciding which macro-actions to execute. The core technical difficulty in this setting is that the options chosen by each agent no longer terminate at the same time. We extend three leading Dec-POMDP algorithms for policy generation to the macro-action case, and demonstrate their effectiveness in both standard benchmarks and a multi-robot coordination problem. The results show that our new algorithms retain agent coordination while allowing high-quality solutions to be generated for significantly longer horizons and larger state-spaces than previous Dec-POMDP methods. Furthermore, in the multi-robot domain, we show that, in contrast to most existing methods that are specialized to a particular problem class, our approach can synthesize control policies that exploit opportunities for coordination while balancing uncertainty, sensor information, and information about other agents.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.210
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence ResearchSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207