Reasoning about Noisy Sensors and Eectors in the Situation Calculus

Agents interacting with an incompletely known world need to be able to reason about the eeects of their actions, and to gain further information about that world they need to use sensors of some sort. Unfortunately, both the eeects of actions and the information returned from sensors are subject to error. To cope with such uncertainties , the agent can maintain probabilistic beliefs about the state of the world. With probabilistic beliefs the agent will be able to quantify the likelihood of the various outcomes of its actions and is better able to utilize the information gathered from its error-prone actions and sensors. In this paper, we p r e s e n t a model in which w e can reason about an agent's probabilistic degrees of belief and the manner in which t h e s e beliefs change as various actions are executed. We build on a general logical theory of action developed by Reiter and others, formalized in the situation calculus. We propose a simple axiomatization that captures an agent's state of belief and the manner in which these beliefs change when actions are executed. Our model displays a number of intuitively reasonable properties.

[1]  Glenn Shafer,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Evidence , 2020, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence.

[2]  Daniel Marcu,et al.  Controlling Autonomous Robots with GOLOG , 1997, Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[3]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  GOLOG: A Logic Programming Language for Dynamic Domains , 1997, J. Log. Program..

[4]  Gerhard Lakemeyer,et al.  Only Knowing in the Situation Calculus , 1996, KR.

[5]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  An Experiment in Using Golog to Build a Personal Banking Assistant , 1996, PRICAI Workshop on Intelligent Agent Systems.

[6]  Fangzhen Lin,et al.  State Constraints Revisited , 1994, J. Log. Comput..

[7]  Moisés Goldszmidt,et al.  Action Networks: A Framework for Reasoning about Actions and Change under Uncertainty , 1994, UAI.

[8]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  The Frame Problem and Knowledge-Producing Actions , 1993, AAAI.

[9]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  The Frame Problem in the Situation Calculus: A Simple Solution (Sometimes) and a Completeness Result for Goal Regression , 1991, Artificial and Mathematical Theory of Computation.

[10]  Michael P. Wellman,et al.  Planning and Control , 1991 .

[11]  Edwin P. D. Pednault,et al.  ADL: Exploring the Middle Ground Between STRIPS and the Situation Calculus , 1989, KR.

[12]  Joseph Y. Halpern.  An Analysis of First-Order Logics of Probability , 1989, IJCAI.

[13]  Henri Prade,et al.  Representation and combination of uncertainty with belief functions and possibility measures , 1988, Comput. Intell..

[14]  John McCarthy,et al.  SOME PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ARTI CIAL INTELLIGENCE , 1987 .

[15]  Leslie Pack Kaelbling,et al.  The Synthesis of Digital Machines With Provable Epistemic Properties , 1986, TARK.

[16]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  A formal model of knowledge, action, and communication in distributed systems: preliminary report , 1985, PODC '85.

[17]  Robert C. Moore.  A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action , 1984 .

[18]  D. Lewis.  Probabilities of Conditionals and Conditional Probabilities , 1976 .

[19]  Gerhard Lakemeyer,et al.  AOL: A logic of Acting, Sensing, Knowing, and Only Knowing , 1998, KR.

[20]  Leo Dorst,et al.  Reasoning with Uncertainty in Robotics , 1996, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[21]  R. Reiter,et al.  Temporal reasoning in the situation calculus , 1994 .

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

[23]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  Representing and reasoning with probabilistic knowledge , 1988 .