Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Bayesian Methods for Intelligent Task Assignment in Crowdsourcing Systems Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2015 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

3. On the Origins of Imperfection and Apparent Non-rationality

verfasst von : Miroslav Kárný, Tatiana V. Guy

Erschienen in: Decision Making: Uncertainty, Imperfection, Deliberation and Scalability

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Decision making (DM) is a preferences-driven choice among available actions. Under uncertainty, Savage’s axiomatisation singles out Bayesian DM as the adequate normative framework. It constructs strategies generating the optimal actions, while assuming that the decision maker rationally tries to meet her preferences. Descriptive DM theories have observed numerous deviations of the real DM from normative recommendations. The explanation of decision-makers’ imperfection or non-rationality, possibly followed by rectification, is the focal point of contemporary DM research. This chapter falls into this stream and claims that the neglecting a part of the behaviour of the closed DM loop is the major cause of these deviations. It inspects DM subtasks in which this claim matters and where its consideration may practically help. It deals with: (i) the preference elicitation; (ii) the “non-rationality” caused by the difference of preferences declared and preferences followed; (iii) the choice of proximity measures in knowledge and preferences fusion; (iv) ways to a systematic design of approximate DM; and (v) the control of the deliberation effort spent on a DM task via sequential DM. The extent of the above list indicates that the discussion offers more open questions than answers, however, their consideration is the key element of this chapter. Their presentation is an important chapter’s ingredient.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Designing Societies of Robots
Nächstes Kapitel Lasso Granger Causal Models: Some Strategies and Their Efficiency for Gene Expression Regulatory Networks
Fußnoten
1
Savage [68] calls it a small world. Alternative terms like system, plant, object are used.
 
2
A pd is the Radon-Nikodým derivative of a probabilistic, randomness-modelling measure.
 
3
The KLD has many names. Relative entropy and cross entropy [70] are the most common.
 
4
When ignorance includes non-constant internals, Bayesian learning used below becomes stochastic filtering [30]. If moreover, the decision maker’s preferences depend on an action-dependent internal state, the stochastic control problem arises [41]. This general case is not treated here as it complicates explanations without offering any conceptual shift.
 
5
Further on, the superscript \(^{\star }\) marks pds and actions arising from this ideal closed-loop model.
 
6
The quest for simple final formulas has motivated a slightly non-standard choice of the “directions” of the ordering operators \(\preceq \), \(\ge \) and \(\prec \), \(>\).
 
7
The existence of such pairs can be assumed without loss of generality. Indeed, no non-trivial decision task arises if all comparable pairs of behaviours in the original decision-maker-specified partial ordering are equivalent.
 
8
The mapping \({\mathsf {R}}_{{\mathsf {S}}}\) is common to decision makers differing only in preferences among behaviours.
 
9
The functional is local if its value on \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}\), artificially written as the sum \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{1}+{\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{2}\) of functions \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{1},\,{\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{2}\) fulfilling \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{1}{\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{2}=0\), is the sum of its values on \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{1}\) and \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{2}\).
 
10
The measure serves to all DM tasks facing the same uncertainty. The function \({\mathsf {U}}\) models risk awareness, neutrality or proneness. The function \({\mathsf {U}}\), \({\mathsf {C}}\)-almost surely increasing in its first argument, guarantees that the optimal strategy \({\mathsf {S}}^{o}\) selected from the considered subset of \({\pmb {{{{\mathsf {S}}}}}}\) is not dominated It means that it cannot happen that within this subset there is a strategy \({\mathsf {S}}^{d}\) such that \({\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{{\mathsf {S}}^{d}}(u)\le {\mathsf {\Lambda }}_{{\mathsf {S}}^{o}}(u)\) on \({\pmb {{{u}}}}\) with the sharp inequality on a subset of \({\pmb {{{u}}}}\) of a positive \({\mathsf {C}}\) measure.
 
11
Giarlotta and Greco [22] represents non-Bayesian set-ups dealing with sets of orderings without a quest for a unique completion.
 
12
A decision maker interacts with customers in order to influence them in a desirable direction, for instance, to buy a specific product or services. However, even the form of the questionnaire influences the customers: typically, two different ways of posing logically the same question often provide quite different answers. This quantum-mechanics-like effect should be properly modelled.
 
13
The vast majority of complex technological processes, which should be modelled by high-dimensional nonlinear stochastic partial differential equations with non-smooth boundary conditions, are controlled by proportional-integral-derivative controllers corresponding to simple linear, second order difference equations used as the environment model.
 
14
The adopted notation \(a^{\star }\) stresses that this action value serves for the construction of \({\mathsf {C}}^{\star }\).
 
15
\({\mathsf {S}}^{\star }_{0}(a_{t}|o_{t},k_{t-1})\) and \(a^{\star }_{t}(k_{t-1})\) are independent of \(o_{t}\), i.e. \({\mathsf {S}}^{\star }_{}(a_{t}|o_{t},k_{t-1})={\mathsf {S}}^{\star }(a_{t}|k_{t-1})\), see (3.21).
 
16
The condition \(z_{t}=1\) stresses that the optimisation is performed: it is not stopped.
 
Literatur
1.
Barndorff-Nielsen, O.: Information and Exponential Families in Statistical Theory. Wiley, New York (1978)MATH
2.
Belda, K.: Probabilistically tuned LQ control for mechatronic applications (paper version). AT&P J. 9(2), 19–24 (2009)MathSciNet
3.
Bellman, R.: Adaptive Control Processes. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1961)MATH
4.
5.
Bertsekas, D.: Dynamic Programming and Optimal Control. Athena Scientific, Belmont (2001)MATH
6.
Bohlin, T.: Interactive System Identification: Prospects and Pitfalls. Springer, New York (1991)CrossRefMATH
7.
Boutilier, B.: A POMDP formulation of preference elicitation problems. In: Proceedings of the 18th National Conference on AI, AAAI-2002, pp. 239–246. Edmonton (2002)
8.
Boutilier, C., Drummond, J., Lu, T.: Preference elicitation for social choice: a study in stable matching and voting. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scalable Decision Making, ECML/PKDD 2013, ÚTIA AVČR, Prague (2013)
9.
Campenhout, J.V., Cover, T.: Maximum entropy and conditional probability. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 27(4), 483–489 (1981)CrossRefMATH
10.
11.
Chen, L., Pu, P.: Survey of preference elicitation methods. Technical Report IC/2004/67, Human Computer Interaction Group Ecole Politechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL), CH-1015 Lausanne (2004)
12.
Conlisk, J.: Why bounded rationality? J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 34(2), 669–700 (1996)
13.
Debreu, G.: Representation of a preference ordering by a numerical function. In: Thrall, R., Coombs, C., Davis, R. (eds.) Decision Processes. Wiley, New York (1954)
14.
DeWitt, B., Graham, N.: The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1973)
15.
Dvurečenskij, A.: Gleasons Theorem and Its Applications, Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 60. Kluwer, Bratislava (1993)CrossRef
16.
17.
Feldbaum, A.: Theory of dual control. Autom. Remote Control 21(9), 874–880 (1960)MathSciNet
18.
19.
Fiori, V., Lintas, A., Mesrobian, S., Villa, A.: Effect of emotion and personality on deviation from purely rational decision-making. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M., Wolpert, D. (eds.) Decision Making and Imperfection. Studies in Computation Intelligence, pp. 133–164. Springer, Berlin (2013)
20.
Fishburn, P.: Utility Theory for Decision Making. Wiley, New York (1970)MATH
21.
Genest, C., Zidek, J.: Combining probability distributions: a critique and annotated bibliography. Stat. Sci. 1(1), 114–148 (1986)CrossRefMathSciNet
22.
23.
Gong, J., Zhang, Y., Yang, Z., Huang, Y., Feng, J., Zhang, W.: The framing effect in medical decision-making: a review of the literature. Psychol. Health Med. 18(6), 645–653 (2013)CrossRef
24.
Grigoroudis, E., Siskos, Y.: Customer Satisfaction Evaluation: Methods for Measuring and Implementing Service Quality. International Series in Operations Research and Management. Springer, New York (2010)CrossRef
25.
Guan, P., Raginsky, M., Willett, R.: Online Markov decision processes with Kullback-Leibler control cost. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 59, 1423–1438 (2014)CrossRefMathSciNet
26.
Guy, T.V., Böhm, J., Kárný, M.: Probabilistic mixture control with multimodal target. In: Andrýsek, J., Kárný, M., Kracík, J. (eds.) Multiple Participant Decision Making, pp. 89–98. Advanced Knowledge International, Adelaide (2004)
27.
Simon, H.A.: Models of Bounded Rationality. MacMillan, London (1997)
28.
Haykin, S.: Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation. Macmillan, New York (1994)MATH
29.
Insua, D., Esteban, P.: Designing societies of robots. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scalable Decision Making Held in Conjunction with ECML/PKDD 2013. ÚTIA AVČR, Prague (2013)
30.
Jazwinski, A.: Stochastic Processes and Filtering Theory. Academic Press, New York (1970)MATH
31.
Jones, B.: Bounded rationality. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2, 297–321 (1999)CrossRef
32.
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: The psychology of preferences. Sci. Am. 246(1), 160–173 (1982)CrossRef
33.
34.
Kárný, M.: Automated preference elicitation for decision making. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M., Wolpert, D. (eds.) Decision Making and Imperfection, vol. 474, pp. 65–99. Springer, Berlin (2013)CrossRef
35.
Kárný, M.: On approximate fully probabilistic design of decision making strategies. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scalable Decision Making, ECML/PKDD 2013. UTIA AV ČR, Prague (2013). ISBN 978-80-903834-8-7
36.
Kárný, M.: Approximate Bayesian recursive estimation. Inf. Sci, 289, 100–111 (2014)
37.
Kárný, M., Andrýsek, J.: Use of Kullback-Leibler divergence for forgetting. Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process. 23(1), 1–15 (2009)CrossRef
38.
Kárný, M., Böhm, J., Guy, T.V., Jirsa, L., Nagy, I., Nedoma, P., Tesař, L.: Optimized Bayesian Dynamic Advising: Theory and Algorithms. Springer, London (2006)
39.
Kárný, M., Guy, T.: Preference elicitation in fully probabilistic design of  decision strategies. In: Proceedings of the 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (2010)
40.
Kárný, M., Guy, T.: Decision making with imperfect decision makers. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M., Wolpert, D. (eds.) On Support of Imperfect Bayesian Participants. Intelligent Systems Reference Library. Springer, Berlin (2012)
41.
Kárný, M., Guy, T.V.: Fully probabilistic control design. Syst. Control Lett. 55(4), 259–265 (2006)CrossRefMATH
42.
Kárný, M., Guy, T.V., Bodini, A., Ruggeri, F.: Cooperation via sharing of probabilistic information. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Stud. 1, 139–162 (2009)CrossRef
43.
Kárný, M., Halousková, A., Böhm, J., Kulhavý, R., Nedoma, P.: Design of linear quadratic adaptive control: theory and algorithms for practice. Kybernetika 21 (Supp. 3–6) (1985)
44.
Kárný, M., Jeníček, T., Ottenheimer, W.: Contribution to prior tuning of LQG selftuners. Kybernetika 26(2), 107–121 (1990)MATHMathSciNet
45.
Kárný, M., Kroupa, T.: Axiomatisation of fully probabilistic design. Inf. Sci. 186(1), 105–113 (2012)CrossRefMATH
46.
Kárný, M., Nedoma, P.: The 2nd European IEEE Workshop on Computer Intensive Methods in Control and Signal Processing. In: Berec, L., et al. (eds.) On Completion of Probabilistic Models, pp. 59–64. ÚTIA AVČR, Prague (1996)
47.
Kerridge, D.: Inaccuracy and inference. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 23, 284–294 (1961)MathSciNet
48.
Knejflová, Z., Avanesyan, G., Guy, T.V., Kárný, M.: What lies beneath players’ non-rationality in ultimatum game? In: Guy, T., Kárný, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scalable Decision Making, ECML/PKDD 2013. UTIA AV ČR, Prague (2013)
49.
Knoll, M.A.: The role of behavioral economics and behavioral decision making in Americans’ retirement savings decisions. Soc. Secur. Bull. 70(4), 1–23 (2010)
50.
51.
Kulhavý, R.: A Bayes-closed approximation of recursive nonlinear estimation. Int. J. Adapt. Control Signal Process. 4, 271–285 (1990)CrossRefMATH
52.
Kulhavý, R., Kraus, F.J.: On duality of regularized exponential and linear forgetting. Automatica 32, 1403–1415 (1996)CrossRefMATH
53.
Kulhavý, R., Zarrop, M.B.: On a general concept of forgetting. Int. J. Control 58(4), 905–924 (1993)CrossRefMATH
54.
55.
56.
Landa, J., Wang, X.: Bounded rationality of economic man: decision making under ecological, social, and institutional constraints. J. Bioecon. 3, 217–235 (2001)CrossRef
57.
Lindley, D.: The future of statistics—a Bayesian 21st century. Suppl. Adv. Appl. Probab. 7, 106–115 (1975)CrossRefMATH
58.
Marczewski, E.: Sur l’extension de l’ordre partiel. Fundamental Mathematicae 16, 386–389 (1930). In French
59.
McCormick, T., Raftery, A.E., Madigan, D., Burd, R.: Dynamic logistic regression and dynamic model averaging for binary classification. Technical Report Columbia University (2010)
60.
Meditch, J.: Stochastic Optimal Linear Estimation and Control. McGraw Hill, New York (1969)MATH
61.
Novák, M., Böhm, J.: Adaptive LQG controller tuning. In: Hamza, M.H. (ed.) Proceedings of the 22nd IASTED International Conference Modelling, Identification and Control. Acta Press, Calgary (2003)
62.
Novikov, A.: Optimal sequential procedures with Bayes decision rules. Kybernetika 46(4), 754–770 (2010)MATHMathSciNet
63.
Peterka, V.: Bayesian system identification. In: Eykhoff, P. (ed.) Trends and Progress in System Identification, pp. 239–304. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1981)CrossRef
64.
Pothos, E., Busemeyer, J.: A quantum probability explanation for violations of ‘rational’ decision theory. In: Proceedings of The Royal Society B, pp. 2171–2178 (2009)
65.
Rao, M.: Measure Theory and Integration. Wiley, New York (1987)MATH
66.
Regenwetter, M., Dana, J., Davis-Stober, C.: Transitivity of preferences. Psychol. Rev. 118(1), 42–56 (2011)CrossRef
67.
Roberts, S.: Scalable information aggregation from weak information sources. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scalable Decision Making held in conjunction with ECML/PKDD 2013, ÚTIA AVČR, Prague (2013)
68.
Savage, L.: Foundations of Statistics. Wiley, New York (1954)MATH
69.
Sečkárová, V.: On supra-Bayesian weighted combination of available data determined by Kerridge inaccuracy and entropy. Pliska Stud. Math. Bulg. 22, 159–168 (2013)
70.
Shore, J., Johnson, R.: Axiomatic derivation of the principle of maximum entropy and the principle of minimum cross-entropy. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 26(1), 26–37 (1980)CrossRefMATHMathSciNet
71.
Si, J., Barto, A., Powell, W., Wunsch, D. (eds.): Handbook of Learning and Approximate Dynamic Programming. Wiley, Danvers (2004)
72.
Simon, H.: A behavioral model of rational choice. Q. Econ. 69, 299–310 (1955)CrossRef
73.
Simon, H.: Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. Am. Econ. Rev. 69, 253–283 (1959)
74.
75.
Tishby, N.: Predictive information and the brain’s internal time. In: Guy, T., Kárný, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Scalable Decision Making Held in  Conjunction with ECML/PKDD 2013, ÚTIA AVČR, Prague (2013)
76.
Tishby, N., Polani, D.: Information theory of decisions and actions. In: Cutsuridis, V., Hussain, A., Taylor, J. (eds.) Perception-Action Cycle. Springer Series in Cognitive and Neural Systems, pp. 601–636. Springer, New York (2011)CrossRef
77.
Titterington, D., Smith, A., Makov, U.: Statistical Analysis of Finite Mixtures. Wiley, New York (1985)
78.
Todorov, E.: Advances in Neural Information Processing. In: Schölkopf, B., et al. (eds.) Linearly-solvable Markov decision problems, pp. 1369–1376. MIT Press, New York (2006)
79.
Tordesillas, R., Chaiken, S.: Thinking too much or too little? the effects of introspection on the decision-making process. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 25, 623–629 (1999)CrossRef
80.
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertain. 5, 297–323 (1992)CrossRefMATH
81.
Wald, A.: Statistical Decision Functions. Wiley, London (1950)MATH
Metadaten
Titel
On the Origins of Imperfection and Apparent Non-rationality
verfasst von
Miroslav Kárný
Tatiana V. Guy
Copyright-Jahr
2015
Buch
Decision Making: Uncertainty, Imperfection, Deliberation and Scalability

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-15143-4

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-15144-1

Copyright-Jahr: 2015

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15144-1_3