Toward Personalization of User Preferences in Partially Observable Smart Home Environments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The technologies used in smart homes have recently improved to learn the user preferences from feedback in order to enhance the user convenience and quality of experience. Most smart homes learn a uniform model to represent the thermal preferences of users, which generally fails when the pool of occupants includes people with different sensitivities to temperature, for instance, due to age and physiological factors. Thus, a smart home with a single optimal policy may fail to provide comfort when a new user with a different preference is integrated into the home. In this article, we propose a Bayesian reinforcement learning framework that can approximate the current occupant state in a partially observable smart home environment using its thermal preference and, then, identify the occupant as a new user or someone who is already known to the system. Our proposed framework can be used to identify users based on the temperature and humidity preferences of the occupant when performing different activities to enable personalization and improve comfort. We then compare the proposed framework with a baseline long short-term memory learner that learns the thermal preference of the user from the sequence of actions that it takes. We perform these experiments with up to five simulated human models each based on hierarchical reinforcement learning. The results show that our framework can approximate the belief state of the current user just by its temperature and humidity preferences across different activities with a high degree of accuracy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it