MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212222585 · doi:10.1109/tai.2021.3127483

Potential Impacts of Smart Homes on Human Behavior: A Reinforcement Learning Approach

2021· article· en· W3212222585 on OpenAlexafffund
Shashi Suman, Ali Etemad, François Rivest

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGreen IT and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReinforcement learningSet (abstract data type)InterleavingComputer scienceProcess (computing)Human behaviorTask (project management)ReinforcementMarkov decision processSmart environmentArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionMarkov processEngineeringPsychologyInternet of ThingsMathematicsComputer securitySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We aim to investigate the potential impacts of smart homes on human behavior. To this end, we simulate a series of human models capable of performing various activities inside a reinforcement learning-based smart home. We then investigate the possibility of human behavior being altered as a result of the smart home and the human model adapting to one-another. We design a semi-Markov decision process human task interleaving model based on hierarchical reinforcement learning that learns to make decisions to either pursue or leave an activity. We then integrate our human model in the smart home which is based on Q-learning. We show that a smart home trained on a generic human model is able to anticipate and learn the thermal preferences of human models with intrinsic rewards similar to the generic model. The hierarchical human model learns to complete each activity and set optimal thermal settings for maximum comfort. With the smart home, the number of time steps required to change the thermal settings are reduced for the human models. Interestingly, we observe that small variations in the human model reward structures can lead to the opposite behavior in the form of unexpected switching between activities which signals changes in human behavior due to the presence of the smart home.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicGreen IT and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207