Towards Adjustable Autonomy for the Real World

Adjustable autonomy refers to entities dynamically varying their own autonomy, transferring decision-making control to other entities (typically agents transferring control to human users) in key situations. Determining whether and when such transfers-of-control should occur is arguably the fundamental research problem in adjustable autonomy. Previous work has investigated various approaches to addressing this problem but has often focused on individual agent-human interactions. Unfortunately, domains requiring collaboration between teams of agents and humans reveal two key shortcomings of these previous approaches. First, these approaches use rigid one-shot transfers of control that can result in unacceptable coordination failures in multiagent settings. Second, they ignore costs (e.g., in terms of time delays or effects on actions) to an agent's team due to such transfers-of-control. To remedy these problems, this article presents a novel approach to adjustable autonomy, based on the notion of a transfer-of-control strategy. A transfer-of-control strategy consists of a conditional sequence of two types of actions: (i) actions to transfer decision-making control (e.g., from an agent to a user or vice versa) and (ii) actions to change an agent's pre-specified coordination constraints with team members, aimed at minimizing miscoordination costs. The goal is for high-quality individual decisions to be made with minimal disruption to the coordination of the team. We present a mathematical model of transfer-of-control strategies. The model guides and informs the operationalization of the strategies using Markov Decision Processes, which select an optimal strategy, given an uncertain environment and costs to the individuals and teams. The approach has been carefully evaluated, including via its use in a real-world, deployed multi-agent system that assists a research group in its daily activities.

[1]  Krithi Ramamritham,et al.  Evaluation of a flexible task scheduling algorithm for distributed hard real-time systems , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[2]  Stuart J. Russell,et al.  Principles of Metareasoning , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[3]  Mark A. Peot,et al.  Conditional nonlinear planning , 1992 .

[4]  Daniel S. Weld,et al.  Probabilistic Planning with Information Gathering and Contingent Execution , 1994, AIPS.

[5]  Martin L. Puterman,et al.  Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming , 1994 .

[6]  Tom M. Mitchell,et al.  Experience with a learning personal assistant , 1994, CACM.

[7]  James F. Allen,et al.  TRAINS-95: Towards a Mixed-Initiative Planning Assistant , 1996, AIPS.

[8]  Shlomo Zilberstein,et al.  Using Anytime Algorithms in Intelligent Systems , 1996, AI Mag..

[9]  Christine M. Mitchell,et al.  Human interaction with lights-out automation: a field study , 1996, Proceedings Third Annual Symposium on Human Interaction with Complex Systems. HICS'96.

[10]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Towards Flexible Teamwork , 1997, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[11]  S. Guerlain,et al.  Integrated Task Representation for Indirect InteractionPosition , 1997 .

[12]  Erann Gat,et al.  Experiences with an architecture for intelligent, reactive agents , 1997, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[13]  David Kortenkamp,et al.  Adjustable Autonomy for Human-Centered Autonomous Systems on Mars , 1998 .

[14]  James F. Allen,et al.  TRIPS: An Integrated Intelligent Problem-Solving Assistant , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[15]  Amedeo Cesta,et al.  Tailorable Interactive Agents for Scheduling Meetings , 1998, AIMSA.

[16]  Eric Horvitz,et al.  Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces , 1999, CHI '99.

[17]  Eric Horvitz,et al.  Attention-Sensitive Alerting , 1999, UAI.

[18]  Worthy N. Martin,et al.  Effects of Uncertainty on Variable Autonomy in Maintenance Robots , 1999 .

[19]  Debra Schreckenghost Human Interaction with Control Software Supporting Adjustable Autonomy , 1999 .

[20]  David J. Musliner,et al.  Adjustable Autonomy in Procedural Control for Refineries , 1999 .

[21]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  The UMASS intelligent home project , 1999, AGENTS '99.

[22]  Maria L. Gini,et al.  Mixed-initiative decision support in agent-based automated contracting , 2000, AGENTS '00.

[23]  K. Suzanne Barber,et al.  Dynamic adaptive autonomy in multi-agent systems , 2000, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[24]  David Kortenkamp,et al.  Introduction to autonomy control software , 2000, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[25]  Abhimanyu Das,et al.  Adaptive agent integration architectures for heterogeneous team members , 2000, Proceedings Fourth International Conference on MultiAgent Systems.

[26]  K. Suzanne Barber,et al.  A Communication Protocol Supporting Dynamic Autonomy Agreements in Multi-agent Systems , 2000, PRICAI Workshops.

[27]  Jean Oh,et al.  Electric Elves: Immersing an Agent Organization in a Human Organization , 2000 .

[28]  Henry Hexmoor,et al.  A Cognitive Model of Situated Autonomy , 2000, PRICAI Workshops.

[29]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Adjustable autonomy in real-world multi-agent environments , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[30]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Experiments in adjustable autonomy , 2001, 2001 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. e-Systems and e-Man for Cybernetics in Cyberspace (Cat.No.01CH37236).

[31]  Jean Oh,et al.  Electric Elves: Applying Agent Technology to Support Human Organizations , 2001, IAAI.

[32]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Revisiting Asimov's First Law: A Response to the Call to Arms , 2001, ATAL.

[33]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Why the elf acted autonomously: towards a theory of adjustable autonomy , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[34]  Charles E. Thorpe,et al.  Robot as Partner: Vehicle Teleoperation with Collaborative Control , 2002 .