Possibilistic sequential decision making

When the information about uncertainty cannot be quantified in a simple, probabilistic way, the topic of possibilistic decision theory is often a natural one to consider. The development of possibilistic decision theory has lead to the proposition a series of possibilistic criteria, namely: optimistic and pessimistic possibilistic qualitative criteria [7], possibilistic likely dominance [2] and [9], binary possibilistic utility [11] and possibilistic Choquet integrals [24]. This paper focuses on sequential decision making in possibilistic decision trees. It proposes a theoretical study on the complexity of the problem of finding an optimal strategy depending on the monotonicity property of the optimization criteria – when the criterion is transitive, this property indeed allows a polytime solving of the problem by Dynamic Programming. We show that most possibilistic decision criteria, but possibilistic Choquet integrals, satisfy monotonicity and that the corresponding optimization problems can be solved in polynomial time by Dynamic Programming. Concerning the possibilistic likely dominance criteria which is quasi-transitive but not fully transitive, we propose an extended version of Dynamic Programming which remains polynomial in the size of the decision tree. We also show that for the particular case of possibilistic Choquet integrals, the problem of finding an optimal strategy is NP-hard. It can be solved by a Branch and Bound algorithm. Experiments show that even not necessarily optimal, the strategies built by Dynamic Programming are generally very good.

[1]  Régis Sabbadin,et al.  Possibilistic Influence Diagrams , 2006, ECAI.

[2]  Gildas Jeantet,et al.  Rank-Dependent Probability Weighting in Sequential Decision Problems under Uncertainty , 2008, ICAPS.

[3]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Possibility Theory - An Approach to Computerized Processing of Uncertainty , 1988 .

[4]  Judea Pearl,et al.  From Conditional Oughts to Qualitative Decision Theory , 1993, UAI.

[5]  Nic Wilson,et al.  An Order of Magnitude Calculus , 1995, UAI.

[6]  H Raiffa,et al.  Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices under Uncertainty. , 1969 .

[7]  Matthias C. M. Troffaes,et al.  Normal form backward induction for decision trees with coherent lower previsions , 2011, Ann. Oper. Res..

[8]  Nahla Ben Amor,et al.  On the Complexity of Decision Making in Possibilistic Decision Trees , 2011, UAI.

[9]  Phan Hong Giang,et al.  A Qualitative Linear Utility Theory for Spohn's Theory of Epistemic Beliefs , 2000, UAI.

[10]  Fabio Gagliardi Cozman,et al.  Partially Ordered Preferences in Decision Trees: Computing Strategies with Imprecision in Probabilities , 2005, IJCAI 2005.

[11]  Phan Hong Giang,et al.  A Comparison of Axiomatic Approaches to Qualitative Decision Making Using Possibility Theory , 2001, UAI.

[12]  Wolfgang Spohn,et al.  A general non-probabilistic theory of inductive reasoning , 2013, UAI.

[13]  Jérôme Lang,et al.  Towards qualitative approaches to multi-stage decision making , 1998, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[14]  Patrice Perny,et al.  Qualitative Models for Decision Under Uncertainty without the Commensurability Assumption , 1999, UAI.

[15]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Possibility theory , 2018, Scholarpedia.

[16]  Howard Raiffa,et al.  Decision analysis: introductory lectures on choices under uncertainty. 1968. , 1969, M.D.Computing.

[17]  Patrice Perny,et al.  Algebraic Markov Decision Processes , 2005, IJCAI.

[18]  M. Yaari The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk , 1987 .

[19]  J. Benzecri,et al.  Théorie des capacités , 1956 .

[20]  Régis Sabbadin,et al.  A Possibilistic Model for Qualitative Sequential Decision Problems under Uncertainty in Partially Observable Environments , 1999, UAI.

[21]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Epistemic Entrenchment and Possibilistic Logic , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[22]  J. Quiggin A theory of anticipated utility , 1982 .

[23]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Making Decision in a Qualitative Setting: from Decision under Uncertaintly to Case-based Decision , 1998, KR.

[24]  Khaled Mellouli,et al.  Qualitative possibilistic influence diagrams based on qualitative possibilistic utilities , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  Gildas Jeantet,et al.  Computing rank dependent utility in graphical models for sequential decision problems , 2011, Artif. Intell..

[26]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Possibility Theory as a Basis for Qualitative Decision Theory , 1995, IJCAI.

[27]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Qualitative decision theory with preference relations and comparative uncertainty: An axiomatic approach , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[28]  L. Zadeh Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility , 1999 .

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

[30]  Yann Rébillé,et al.  Decision making over necessity measures through the Choquet integral criterion , 2006, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[31]  Phan Hong Giang,et al.  Two axiomatic approaches to decision making using possibility theory , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[32]  David Schmeidleis SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITY AND EXPECTED UTILITY WITHOUT ADDITIVITY , 1989 .

[33]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Qualitative decision theory: from savage's axioms to nonmonotonic reasoning , 2002, JACM.