Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.5555/2772879.2772928acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaamasConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

To Ask, Sense, or Share: Ad Hoc Information Gathering

Published: 04 May 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Agents operating in complex (e.g., dynamic, uncertain, partially observable) environments must gather information from various sources to inform their incomplete knowledge. Two popular types of sources include: (1) directly sensing the environment using the agent's sensors, and (2) sharing information between networked agents occupying the same environment. In this paper, we address agent reasoning for appropriately selecting between such types of sources to update agent knowledge over time. In particular, we consider ad hoc environments where agents cannot collaborate in advance to predetermine joint solutions for when to share vs. when to sense. Instead, we propose a solution where agents individually learn the benefits of relying on each type of source to maximize knowledge improvement. We empirically evaluate our learning-based solution in different environment configurations to demonstrate its advantages over other strategies.

References

[1]
N. Agmon, S. Barrett, and P. Stone. Modeling uncertainty in leading ad hoc teams. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'14), pages 397--404, Paris, France, May 5-9, 2014.
[2]
M. Araya-Lopez, O. Buffet, V. Thomas, and F. Charpillet. A POMDP extension with belief-dependent rewards. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS'10), pages 64--72, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, December 6-9, 2010.
[3]
D. S. Bernstein, R. Givan, N. Immerman, and S. Zilberstein. The complexity of decentralized control of Markov decision processes. Mathematics of Operations Research, 27(4):819--840, 2002.
[4]
C. Boutilier. A POMDP formulation of preference elicitation problems. In Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'02), pages 239--246, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, July 28-August 1, 2002.
[5]
R. I. Brafman and M. Tennenholtz. R-max - a general polynomial time algorithm for near-optimal reinforcement learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3:213--231, 2002.
[6]
D. Chakraborty and P. Stone. Cooperating with a Markovian ad hoc teammate. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'13), pages 1085--1092, Saint Paul, MN, May 6-10, 2013.
[7]
F. Doshi and N. Roy. The permutable POMDP: fast solutions to POMDPs for preference elicitation. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'08), pages 493--500, Estoril, Portugal, May 12-16, 2008.
[8]
A. Eck and L.-K. Soh. Observer effect from stateful resources in agent sensing. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 26(2):202--244, 2013.
[9]
P. Erdos and A. Renyi. On the evolution of random graphs. Publication of the Mathematical Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, pages 17--61, 1960.
[10]
K. Genter, N. Agmon, and P. Stone. Ad hoc teamwork for leading a flock. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'13), pages 531--538, Saint Paul, MN, May 6-10, 2013.
[11]
R. Glinton, P. Scerri, and K. Sycara. Exploiting scale invariant dynamics for efficient information propagation in large teams. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'10), pages 21--28, Toronto, Canada, May 10-14, 2010.
[12]
R. Glinton, P. Scerri, and K. Sycara. An investigation of the vulnerabilities of scale invariant dynamics in large teams. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'11), pages 21--28, Taipei, Taiwan, May 2-6, 2011.
[13]
P. J. Gmytrasiewicz and P. Doshi. A framework for sequential planning in multi-agent settings. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 24:49--79, 2005.
[14]
P. Hernandez-Leal, E. M. de Cote, and L. E. Sucar. Exploration strategies to detect strategy switches. In Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Adaptive and Learning Agents (ALA'2014), Paris, France, May 5-6, 2014.
[15]
L. P. Kaelbling, M. L. Littman, and A. R. Cassandra. Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Artificial Intelligence, 101:99--134, 1998.
[16]
L. P. Kaelbling, M. L. Littman, and W. Moore. Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 4:237--285, 1996.
[17]
L. Kocsis and C. Szepesvari. Bandit based Monte-Carlo planning. In Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML'06), pages 282--293, Berlin, Germany, September 18-22, 2006.
[18]
R. Nair, P. Varakantham, M. Tambe, and M. Yokoo. Networked distributed POMDPs: A synthesis of distributed constraint optimization and POMDPs. In Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'05), pages 133--139, Pittsburgh, PA, July 9-13, 2005.
[19]
O. Pryymak, A. Rogers, and N. R. Jennings. Efficient opinion sharing in large decentralized teams. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'12), Valencia, Spain, June 4-8, 2012.
[20]
S. Ross, B. Chaib-draa, and J. Pineau. Bayes-adaptive POMDPs. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS'07), Vancouver, B.C., Canada, December 3-6, 2007.
[21]
J. Sabater and C. Sierra. Reputation and social network analysis in multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'02), pages 475--482, Bologna, Italy, July 15-19, 2002.
[22]
M. Sensoy, A. Fokoue, J. Z. Pan, T. J. Norman, Y. Tang, N. Oren, and K. Sycara. Reasoning about uncertain information and conict resolution through trust revision. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'13), pages 837--844, Saint Paul, MN, May 6-10, 2013.
[23]
M. T. J. Spaan, T. S. Veiga, and P. U. Lima. Active cooperative perception in networked robotic systems using POMDPs. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS'10), pages 4800--4805, Taipei, Taiwan, October 18-22, 2010.
[24]
P. Stone, G. A. Kaminka, S. Kraus, and J. S. Rosenschein. Ad hoc autonomous agent teams: Collaboration without pre-coordination. In Proceedings of the 24th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'10), pages 1504--1509, Atlanta, GA, July 11-15, 2010.
[25]
I. Szita and C. Szepesvari. Model-based reinforcement learning with nearly tight exploration complexity bounds. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML'2010), pages 1031--1038, Haifa, Israel, June 21-24, 2010.
[26]
W. T. Teacy, J. Patel, N. R. Jennings, and M. Luck. TRAVOS: Trust and reputation in the context of inaccurate information sources. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 12(2):183--198, 2006.

Cited By

View all
  • (2017)Allocating training instances to learning agents for team formationAutonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/s10458-016-9355-331:4(905-940)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2017
  • (2016)Using Social Networks to Aid Homeless SheltersProceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems10.5555/2936924.2937034(740-748)Online publication date: 9-May-2016

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
AAMAS '15: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
May 2015
2072 pages
ISBN:9781450334136

Sponsors

  • IFAAMAS

In-Cooperation

Publisher

International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems

Richland, SC

Publication History

Published: 04 May 2015

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. ad hoc
  2. information gathering
  3. information sharing

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • National Science Foundation

Conference

AAMAS'15
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

AAMAS '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 108 of 670 submissions, 16%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,155 of 5,036 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2017)Allocating training instances to learning agents for team formationAutonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/s10458-016-9355-331:4(905-940)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2017
  • (2016)Using Social Networks to Aid Homeless SheltersProceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems10.5555/2936924.2937034(740-748)Online publication date: 9-May-2016

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media