Anticipating Responsibility in Multiagent Planning
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16685v1
- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 13:58:49 GMT
- Title: Anticipating Responsibility in Multiagent Planning
- Authors: Timothy Parker, Umberto Grandi, Emiliano Lorini
- Abstract summary: Responsibility anticipation is a process of determining if the actions of an individual agent may cause it to be responsible for a particular outcome.
This can be used in a multi-agent planning setting to allow agents to anticipate responsibility in the plans they consider.
- Score: 9.686474898346392
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Responsibility anticipation is the process of determining if the actions of
an individual agent may cause it to be responsible for a particular outcome.
This can be used in a multi-agent planning setting to allow agents to
anticipate responsibility in the plans they consider. The planning setting in
this paper includes partial information regarding the initial state and
considers formulas in linear temporal logic as positive or negative outcomes to
be attained or avoided. We firstly define attribution for notions of active,
passive and contributive responsibility, and consider their agentive variants.
We then use these to define the notion of responsibility anticipation. We prove
that our notions of anticipated responsibility can be used to coordinate agents
in a planning setting and give complexity results for our model, discussing
equivalence with classical planning. We also present an outline for solving
some of our attribution and anticipation problems using PDDL solvers.
Related papers
- Ask-before-Plan: Proactive Language Agents for Real-World Planning [68.08024918064503]
Proactive Agent Planning requires language agents to predict clarification needs based on user-agent conversation and agent-environment interaction.
We propose a novel multi-agent framework, Clarification-Execution-Planning (textttCEP), which consists of three agents specialized in clarification, execution, and planning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-18T14:07:28Z) - A Semantic Approach to Decidability in Epistemic Planning (Extended
Version) [72.77805489645604]
We use a novel semantic approach to achieve decidability.
Specifically, we augment the logic of knowledge S5$_n$ and with an interaction axiom called (knowledge) commutativity.
We prove that our framework admits a finitary non-fixpoint characterization of common knowledge, which is of independent interest.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-28T11:26:26Z) - Adaptation and Communication in Human-Robot Teaming to Handle
Discrepancies in Agents' Beliefs about Plans [13.637799815698559]
We provide an online execution algorithm based on Monte Carlo Tree Search for the agent to plan its action.
We show that our agent is better equipped to work in teams without the guarantee of a shared mental model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-07T03:05:34Z) - Formalizing the Problem of Side Effect Regularization [81.97441214404247]
We propose a formal criterion for side effect regularization via the assistance game framework.
In these games, the agent solves a partially observable Markov decision process.
We show that this POMDP is solved by trading off the proxy reward with the agent's ability to achieve a range of future tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-23T16:36:13Z) - What Should I Know? Using Meta-gradient Descent for Predictive Feature
Discovery in a Single Stream of Experience [63.75363908696257]
computational reinforcement learning seeks to construct an agent's perception of the world through predictions of future sensations.
An open challenge in this line of work is determining from the infinitely many predictions that the agent could possibly make which predictions might best support decision-making.
We introduce a meta-gradient descent process by which an agent learns what predictions to make, 2) the estimates for its chosen predictions, and 3) how to use those estimates to generate policies that maximize future reward.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-13T21:31:06Z) - Efficient Multi-agent Epistemic Planning: Teaching Planners About Nested
Belief [27.524600740450126]
We plan from the perspective of a single agent with the potential for goals and actions that involve nested beliefs, non-homogeneous agents, co-present observations, and the ability for one agent to reason as if it were another.
Our approach represents an important step towards applying the well-established field of automated planning to the challenging task of planning involving nested beliefs of multiple agents.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-06T03:24:01Z) - Collaborative Human-Agent Planning for Resilience [5.2123460114614435]
We investigate whether people can collaborate with agents by providing their knowledge to an agent using linear temporal logic (LTL) at run-time.
We present 24 participants with baseline plans for situations in which a planner had limitations, and asked the participants for workarounds for these limitations.
Results show that participants' constraints improved the expected return of the plans by 10%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-29T03:21:31Z) - Contrastive Explanations of Plans Through Model Restrictions [11.259587284318833]
We frame Explainable AI Planning in the context of the plan negotiation problem.
We present the results of a user study that demonstrates that when users ask questions about plans, those questions are contrastive.
We use the data from this study to construct a taxonomy of user questions that often arise during plan negotiation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-03-29T12:47:15Z) - Modelling Multi-Agent Epistemic Planning in ASP [66.76082318001976]
This paper presents an implementation of a multi-shot Answer Set Programming-based planner that can reason in multi-agent epistemic settings.
The paper shows how the planner, exploiting an ad-hoc epistemic state representation and the efficiency of ASP solvers, has competitive performance results on benchmarks collected from the literature.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-07T06:35:56Z) - Causality, Responsibility and Blame in Team Plans [24.99901958667372]
We show how team plans can be represented in terms of structural equations.
We then apply the definitions of causality introduced by Halpern [2015] and degree of responsibility and blame introduced by Chockler and Halpern [2004] to determine the agent(s) who caused the failure.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-20T18:21:19Z) - Model-based Reinforcement Learning for Decentralized Multiagent
Rendezvous [66.6895109554163]
Underlying the human ability to align goals with other agents is their ability to predict the intentions of others and actively update their own plans.
We propose hierarchical predictive planning (HPP), a model-based reinforcement learning method for decentralized multiagent rendezvous.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-03-15T19:49:20Z)
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.