Abstract
Plan recognition is an important task whenever a system has to take into account an agent's actions and goals in order to be able to react adequately. Most plan recognizers work by merely maintaining a set of equally plausible plan hypotheses each of which proved compatible with recent observations without taking into account individual preferences of the currently observed agent. Such additional information provides a basis for ranking the hypotheses so that the “best” one can be selected whenever the system is forced to react (e.g., to provide help to the user of a software system to accomplish his goals). Furthermore, hypotheses with low valuations can be excluded from considerations at an early stage. In this paper, an approach to the quantitative modeling of the required agent-related data and their use in plan recognition is presented. It relies on the DempsterShafer Theory and provides mechanisms for the initialization and update of corresponding numerical values.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AAAI: 1986,Proceedings of the 5th National Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Philadelphia, PA.
Bauer, M. and G. Paul: 1993, ‘Logic-Based Plan Recognition for Intelligent Help Systems’. In C. Bäckström and E. Sandewall (eds.),Current Trends in AI Planning: Proceedings of the Second European Workshop on Planning, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Vadstena, Sweden. IOS Press, pp. 60–73.
Bauer, M., S. Biundo, D. Dengler, J. Koehler and G. Paul: 1993, ‘PHI — A Logic-Based Tool for Intelligent Help Systems’. In R. Bajcsy (ed.),Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Chambéry, France. Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 460–466.
Bauer, M.: 1994a, ‘Integrating Probabilistic Reasoning into Plan Recognition’. InProceedings of the 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Wiley, pp. 620–624.
Bauer, M.: 1994b, ‘Quantitative Modeling of User Preferences for Plan Recognition’. In Goodman et al. (1994), pp. 73–78.
Calistri-Yeh, R. J.: 1991, ‘Utilizing User Models to Handle Ambiguity and Misconceptions in Robust Plan Recognition’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 2(1–2).
Calistri, R. J.: 1990, ‘Classifying and Detecting Plan-Based Misconceptions for Robust Plan Recognition’. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University, RI.
Carberry, S.: 1990a, ‘Incorporating Default Inferences into Plan Recognition’. InProceedings of the 8th National Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Boston, MA. MIT Press, pp. 471–478.
Carberry, S.: 1990b, ‘A Model of Plan Recognition that Facilitates Default Inferences’. InProceedings of the Second International Workshop on User Modeling (UM90), Honolulu, Hawaii.
Charniak, E. and R. Goldman: 1991, ‘A Probabilistic Model of Plan Recognition’. InProceedings of the 9th National Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Anaheim, CA. MIT Press, pp. 160–165.
Charniak, E. and R. P. Goldman: 1993, ‘A Bayesian Model of Plan Recognition’.Artificial Intelligence 64(1), 53–79.
Dempster, A. P.: 1967, ‘Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivalued Mapping’.Annals of Mathematical Statistics 38, 325–339.
Dubois, D. and H. Prade: 1985, ‘A Note on Measures of Specificity for Fuzzy Sets’.Int. J. Gen. Syst. 10, 279–283.
Elzer, S., J. Chu-Carroll and S. Carberry: 1994, ‘Recognizing and Utilizing UserPreferences in Collaborative Consultation Dialogues’. In Goodman et al. (1994), pp. 19–24.
Goldman, R. and E. Charniak: 1988, ‘A Probabilistic ATMS for Plan Recognition’. In D. McDermott, L. Birnbaum, J. Maier, R. Wilensky, S. Williams and D. Chubb (eds.),Proceedings of theAAAI-88 Workshop on Plan Recognition, St. Paul, MI.
Goodman, B. A. and D. J. Litman: 1992, ‘On the Interaction between Plan Recognition and Intelligent Interfaces’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 2(1–2), 83–116.
Goodman, B., A. Kobsa and D. Litman (eds.): 1994,Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on User Modeling (UM94), Hyannis, MA, USA. MITRE Corporation.
Guan, J. and D. Bell: 1991,Evidence Theory and Its Applications, Volume 1. Elsevier.
Kautz, H. and J. Alten: 1986, ‘Generalized Plan Recognition’. In AAAI (1986), pp. 32–37.
Kruse, R., E. Schwecke and J. Heinsohn: 1991,Uncertainty and Vagueness in Knowledge-Based Systems. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag.
Maes, P.: 1994, ‘Agents That Reduce Work and Information Overload’.Communications of the ACM 37(7), 31–40.
Orponen, P.: 1990, ‘Dempster's Rule of Combination is # P-complete’.Artificial Intelligence 44, 245–253.
Raskutti, B. and I. Zukerman: 1991a, ‘Generation and Selection of Likely Interpretations during Plan Recognition in Task-Oriented Consultation Systems’.User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 1, 323–353.
Raskutti, B. and I. Zukerman: 1991b, ‘Handling Uncertainty during Plan Recognition in TaskOriented Consultation Systems’. In B. D'Ambrosio, P. Smets and P. Bonissone (eds.),Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, University of Los Angeles, CA, pp. 308–315.
Ruspini, E. H., J. D. Lowrance and T. M. Strat: 1992, ‘Understanding Evidential Reasoning’.International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 6, 401–424.
Ruspini, E. H.: 1986, ‘The Logical Foundations of Evidential Reasoning’. Technical Note 408, SRI International.
Shafer, G.: 1976,A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Shenoy, P.P. and G. Shafer: 1990, ‘Axioms for Probability and Belief-Function Propagation’. In R. D. Shachter, T. S. Levitt, L. N. Kanal and J. F. Lemmer (eds.),Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Volume 4, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 169–198.
Shortliffe, E. H.: 1976,Computer Based Medical Consultations: MYCIN. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Smets, P.: 1988, ‘Belief Functions versus Probability Functions’. In B. Bouchon, L. Saitta and R. Yager (eds.),Uncertainty and Intelligent Systems, Volume 313 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 17–24.
Tessem, B.: 1993, ‘Approximations for Efficient Computation in the Theory of Evidence’.Artificial Intelligence 61, 315–329.
Wilson, N.: 1993, ‘Decision-Making with Belief Functions and Pignistic Probabilities’. In M. Clarke, R. Kruse and S. Moral (eds.),Proceedings of the European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty, Granada, Spain. Volume 747 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, pp. 364–371.
Yen, J.: 1986, ‘A Reasoning Model Based on an Extended Dempster-Shafer Theory’. In AAAI (1986), pp. 125–131.
Yen, J.: 1989, ‘GERTIS: A Dempster-Shafer Approach to Diagnosing Hierarchical Hypotheses’.Communications of the ACM 32(5), 573–585.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bauer, M. A dempster-shafer approach to modeling agent preferences for plan recognition. User Model User-Adap Inter 5, 317–348 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01126114
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01126114