A method for bounding imprecise probabilistic criteria when using a sequential decision process for the design of structural systems

2019 ◽  
Vol 79 ◽  
pp. 39-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaskanwal P.S. Chhabra ◽  
Gordon P. Warn
2007 ◽  
Vol 24 (02) ◽  
pp. 181-202
Author(s):  
YUKIHIRO MARUYAMA

In this paper, we will introduce a new subclass of bitone sequential decision process (bsdp) and give a representation theorem for the subclass called positively/negatively bsdp, shortly, p/n bsdp, that is, necessary and sufficient condition for p/n bsdp to strongly represent a given discrete decision process (ddp).


2004 ◽  
Vol 98 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHRISTIAN LIST

I model sequential decisions over multiple interconnected propositions and investigate path-dependence in such decisions. The propositions and their interconnections are represented in propositional logic. A sequential decision process is path-dependent if its outcome depends on the order in which the propositions are considered. Assuming that earlier decisions constrain later ones, I prove three main results: First, certain rationality violations by the decision-making agent—individual or group—are necessary and sufficient for path-dependence. Second, under some conditions, path-dependence is unavoidable in decisions made by groups. Third, path-dependence makes decisions vulnerable to strategic agenda setting and strategic voting. I also discuss escape routes from path-dependence. My results are relevant to discussions on collective consistency and reason-based decision-making, focusing not only on outcomes, but also on underlying reasons, beliefs, and constraints.


Author(s):  
Simon W. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Michael A. Yukish

Design is a sequential decision process that increases the detail of modeling and analysis while simultaneously decreasing the space of alternatives considered. In a decision theoretic framework, low-fidelity models help decision-makers identify regions of interest in the tradespace and cull others prior to constructing more computationally expensive models of higher fidelity. The method presented herein demonstrates design as a sequence of finite decision epochs through a search space defined by the extent of the set of designs under consideration, and the level of analytic fidelity subjected to each design. Previous work has shown that multi-fidelity modeling can aid in rapid optimization of the design space when high-fidelity models are coupled with low-fidelity models. This paper offers two contributions to the design community: (1) a model of design as a sequential decision process of refinement using progressively more accurate and expensive models, and (2) a connected approach for how conceptual models couple with detailed models. Formal definitions of the process are provided, and a simple one-dimensional example is presented to demonstrate the use of sequential multi-fidelity modeling in determining an optimal modeling selection policy.


Author(s):  
Maximilian E. Ororbia ◽  
Gordon P. Warn

Abstract This article illustrates that structural design synthesis can be achieved through a sequential decision process, whereby a sparsely connected seed configuration is sequentially altered through discrete actions to generate the best design solution, with respect to a specified objective and constraints. Specifically, the generative design synthesis is mathematically formulated as a finite Markov Decision Process. In this context, the states correspond to a specific structural configuration, the actions correspond to the available alterations that can be made to a given configuration, and the immediate rewards are constructed to be proportional to the improvement in the altered configuration’s performance. In the context of generative structural design synthesis, since the immediate rewards are not known at the onset of the process, reinforcement learning is employed to obtain an approximately optimal policy by which to alter the seed configuration to synthesize the best design solution. The approach is applied for the optimization of planar truss structures and its utility is investigated with three numerical examples, each with unique domains and constraints.


2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 709-728
Author(s):  
Maximilian E. Ororbia ◽  
Jaskanwal P. S. Chhabra ◽  
Gordon P. Warn ◽  
Simon W. Miller ◽  
Michael A. Yukish ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Callaway ◽  
Falk Lieder ◽  
Paul Krueger ◽  
Tom Griffiths

Planning is a latent cognitive process that cannot be observed directly. This makes it difficult to study how people plan. To address this problem, we propose a new paradigm for studying planning that provides experimenters with a timecourse of participant attention to information in the task environment. This paradigm employs the information-acquisition mechanism of the Mouselab paradigm, in which participants click on options to reveal the outcome of choosing those options. However, in contrast to the original Mouselab paradigm, our paradigm is a sequential decision process, in which participants must plan multiple steps ahead to achieve high scores. We release Mouselab-MDP open-source as a plugin for the JsPsych online Psychology experiment library. The plugin displays a Markov decision process as a directed graph, which the participant navigates to maximize reward. To trace the the process of planning, the rewards associated with states or actions are initially occluded; the participant has to click on a transition to reveal its reward. This information gathering behavior makes explicit the states the participant considers. We illustrate the utility of the Mouselab-MDP paradigm with a proof-of-concept experiment in which we trace the temporal dynamics of planning in a simple environment. Our data shed new light on people’s approximate planning strategies and on how people prune decision trees. We hope that the release of Mouselab-MDP will facilitate future research on human planning strategies. In particular, we hope that the fine-grained time course data that the paradigm generates will be instrumental in specifying algorithms, tracking learning trajectories, and characterizing individual differences in human planning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document