MADDM: Multi-Advisor Dynamic Binary Decision-Making by Maximizing the Utility

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08664v1
• Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 14:13:47 GMT
• Title: MADDM: Multi-Advisor Dynamic Binary Decision-Making by Maximizing the Utility
• Authors: Zhaori Guo, Timothy J. Norman, Enrico H. Gerding
• Abstract summary: We propose a novel strategy for optimally selecting a set of advisers in a sequential binary decision-making setting. We assume no access to ground truth and no prior knowledge about the reliability of advisers.
• Score: 8.212621730577897
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Being able to infer ground truth from the responses of multiple imperfect advisors is a problem of crucial importance in many decision-making applications, such as lending, trading, investment, and crowd-sourcing. In practice, however, gathering answers from a set of advisors has a cost. Therefore, finding an advisor selection strategy that retrieves a reliable answer and maximizes the overall utility is a challenging problem. To address this problem, we propose a novel strategy for optimally selecting a set of advisers in a sequential binary decision-making setting, where multiple decisions need to be made over time. Crucially, we assume no access to ground truth and no prior knowledge about the reliability of advisers. Specifically, our approach considers how to simultaneously (1) select advisors by balancing the advisors' costs and the value of making correct decisions, (2) learn the trustworthiness of advisers dynamically without prior information by asking multiple advisers, and (3) make optimal decisions without access to the ground truth, improving this over time. We evaluate our algorithm through several numerical experiments. The results show that our approach outperforms two other methods that combine state-of-the-art models.

Related papers

• Expert-guided Bayesian Optimisation for Human-in-the-loop Experimental Design of Known Systems [0.0]
  We apply high- throughput (batch) Bayesian optimisation alongside anthropological decision theory to enable domain experts to influence the selection of optimal experiments. Our methodology exploits the hypothesis that humans are better at making discrete choices than continuous ones and enables experts to influence critical early decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-05T16:09:31Z)
• Online Decision Mediation [72.80902932543474]
  Consider learning a decision support assistant to serve as an intermediary between (oracle) expert behavior and (imperfect) human behavior. In clinical diagnosis, fully-autonomous machine behavior is often beyond ethical affordances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T05:59:43Z)
• ChoiceMates: Supporting Unfamiliar Online Decision-Making with Multi-Agent Conversational Interactions [58.71970923420007]
  We present ChoiceMates, a system that enables conversations with a dynamic set of LLM-powered agents. Agents, as opinionated personas, flexibly join the conversation, not only providing responses but also conversing among themselves to elicit each agent's preferences. Our study (n=36) comparing ChoiceMates to conventional web search and single-agent showed that ChoiceMates was more helpful in discovering, diving deeper, and managing information compared to Web with higher confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T16:49:39Z)
• Active Ranking of Experts Based on their Performances in Many Tasks [72.96112117037465]
  We consider the problem of ranking n experts based on their performances on d tasks. We make a monotonicity assumption stating that for each pair of experts, one outperforms the other on all tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-05T06:55:39Z)
• Eliciting User Preferences for Personalized Multi-Objective Decision Making through Comparative Feedback [76.7007545844273]
  We propose a multi-objective decision making framework that accommodates different user preferences over objectives. Our model consists of a Markov decision process with a vector-valued reward function, with each user having an unknown preference vector. We suggest an algorithm that finds a nearly optimal policy for the user using a small number of comparison queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-07T23:58:19Z)
• Learning from Multiple Independent Advisors in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning [15.195932300563541]
  This paper considers the problem of simultaneously learning from multiple independent advisors in multi-agent reinforcement learning. We provide principled algorithms that incorporate a set of advisors by both evaluating the advisors at each state and subsequently using the advisors to guide action selection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-26T15:00:23Z)
• On solving decision and risk management problems subject to uncertainty [91.3755431537592]
  Uncertainty is a pervasive challenge in decision and risk management. This paper develops a systematic understanding of such strategies, determine their range of application, and develop a framework to better employ them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-18T19:16:23Z)
• Multi-Agent Advisor Q-Learning [18.8931184962221]
  We provide a principled framework for incorporating action recommendations from online sub-optimal advisors in multi-agent settings. We present two novel Q-learning based algorithms: ADMIRAL - Decision Making (ADMIRAL-DM) and ADMIRAL - Advisor Evaluation (ADMIRAL-AE) We analyze the algorithms theoretically and provide fixed-point guarantees regarding their learning in general-sum games.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-26T00:21:15Z)
• Dealing with Expert Bias in Collective Decision-Making [4.588028371034406]
  We propose a new algorithmic approach based on contextual multi-armed bandit problems (CMAB) to identify and counteract biased expertises. Our novel CMAB-inspired approach achieves a higher final performance and does so while converging more rapidly than previous adaptive algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T10:17:37Z)
• Confidence-Budget Matching for Sequential Budgeted Learning [69.77435313099366]
  We formalize decision-making problems with querying budget. We consider multi-armed bandits, linear bandits, and reinforcement learning problems. We show that CBM based algorithms perform well in the presence of adversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-05T19:56:31Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.