Making Rational Decisions Using Adaptive Utility Elicitation

Rational decision making requires full knowledge of the utility function of the person affected by the decisions. However, in many cases, the task of acquiring such knowledge is not feasible due to the size of the outcome space and the complexity of the utility elicitation process. Given that the amount of utility information we can acquire is limited, we need to make decisions with partial utility information and should carefully select which utility elicitation questions we ask. In this paper, we propose a new approach for this problem that utilizes a prior probability distribution over the person’s utility function, perhaps learned from a population of similar people. The relevance of a utility elicitation question for the current decision problem can then be measured using its value of information. We propose an algorithm that interleaves the analysis of the decision problem and utility elicitation to allow these two tasks to inform each other. At every step, it asks the utility elicitation question giving us the highest value of information and computes the best strategy based on the information acquired so far, stopping when the expected utility loss resulting from our recommendation falls below a pre-specified threshold. We show how the various steps of this algorithm can be implemented efficiently.

[1]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[2]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Information Value Theory , 1966, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern..

[3]  John B. Kidd,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives—Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1977 .

[4]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[5]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems , 1988 .

[6]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Readings on the Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis , 1989 .

[7]  R. Kane,et al.  Methodology for measuring health-state preferences--II: Scaling methods. , 1989, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[8]  C. Robert Kenley,et al.  Gaussian influence diagrams , 1989 .

[9]  Ross D. Shachter,et al.  Patient-specific explanation in models of chronic disease , 1992, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[10]  Eric Horvitz,et al.  Reasoning about the Value of Decision-Model Refinement: Methods and Application , 1993, UAI.

[11]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[12]  Frank Jensen,et al.  From Influence Diagrams to junction Trees , 1994, UAI.

[13]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Neural networks for pattern recognition , 1995 .

[14]  Anthony Jameson,et al.  Adaptive Provision of Evaluation-Oriented Information: Tasks and Techniques , 1995, IJCAI.

[15]  M. Kuppermann,et al.  Can Preference Scores for Discrete States Be Used to Derive Preference Scores for an Entire Path of Events? , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[16]  Greg Linden,et al.  Interactive Assessment of User Preference Models: The Automated Travel Assistant , 1997 .

[17]  Yuval Shahar,et al.  Utility Elicitation as a Classification Problem , 1998, UAI.

[18]  L. Lenert,et al.  The Effect of Search Procedures on Utility Elicitations , 1998, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[19]  Daphne Koller,et al.  Utilities as Random Variables: Density Estimation and Structure Discovery , 2000, UAI.