Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 215–248 | Cite as

ELA—A new Approach for Learning Agents

Article

Abstract

In this paper we discuss a new incremental learning approach used to implement adaptive behavior in autonomous agents. Adaptive agents must increase their performance based on experience using some learning approach. Often, incremental learning techniques like memory-based reasoning (MBR) are used. However, traditional MBR algorithms require an adequate (generally complex) measure of similarity, need much data and spend much time for computing similarities between examples. Such problems are unacceptable for autonomous agents that live in very dynamic environments, because they have little time to make decisions. Our approach does not use similarity measures between examples, classifies examples very fast and can compact data. We represent data as a concept graph (CG), each node representing a partition of the data. We propose an algorithm that uses the partitions to classify new examples. We compare our results with other techniques and conclude that the method performs quite well. Finally, we apply the approach to an application of adaptive agents for personalizing web search.

Keywords

adaptive agents incremental learning memory-based reasoning 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. R. Agrawal, and R. Srikant, ‘‘Mining sequential patterns’’, Philip S. Yu and Arbee L. P. Chen (eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Data Engineering - ICDE, IEEE Press, 6 October, 3–14 pp 1995. (ISBN 0-8186-6910-1).Google Scholar
  2. Aha, D. W., Kibler, D., Albert, M. K. 1991Instance-based learning algorithmsMachine Learning63766Google Scholar
  3. J.-P. Barthès, ‘‘OMAS v 1.0. Memo UTC/GI/DI/N 151, Université de Technologie de Compiègne’’, Département de Génie Informatique, Jannuary, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. S. D. Bay, and M. J. Pazzani, ‘‘Detecting change in categorical data: Mining contrast sets,’’ Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 302–306, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. S. Benson, ‘‘Inductive learning of reactive action models’’, ICML’95, pp. 47–54, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. D. Billsus, and M. Pazzani, A hybrid user model for news story classification. in Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on User Modeling (UM ‘99), Banff. Canada. 1999.Google Scholar
  7. C. Blake, C. J. Merz, ‘‘UCI Repositoryofmachine learningdatabases–www.ics.uci.edu/ \(\tilde{m}\) learn/MLRepository.html’’. Irvine, CA: University of California, Department of Information and Computer Science.Google Scholar
  8. Brooker, L. B., Goldberg, D. E., Holland, J. H. 1989Classifier systems and genetic algorithmsArtificial Intelligence40235282Google Scholar
  9. W. Brenner, R. Zarnekow, H. Wittig, ‘‘Intelligent software agents’’, Springer-Verlag. 1998. ISBN 3-540-63411-8.Google Scholar
  10. H. Brighton, C. Mellish, ‘‘Advances in instance selection for instance-based learning algorithms,’’ Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Kluwer Academic Publishers. no. 6, pp. 153--172, 2002.Google Scholar
  11. J. Chapelle, O. Simonin, J. Ferber, ‘‘How situated agents can learn to cooperate by monitoring their neighborsśatisfaction’’, F. van Harmelen (ed.), in ECAIÓ2, IOS Press, pp. 68–72, 2002. ISBN 1-58603-257-7.Google Scholar
  12. P. Cunningham, B. Smyth, and T. Veale, ‘‘On the limitations of memory based reasoning’’, in Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning, Paris, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. K. Dorer, ‘‘Behavior networks for continuous domains using situation-dependent motivations’’, in Proceedings of the IJCAI9’9, pp. 1233–1238, 1999. http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/dorer99behavior.html.Google Scholar
  14. P. W. Eklund, A. Hoang, ‘‘A performance survey of public domain supervised machine learning algorithms’’, in Technical Report of Knowledge Visualisation and Ordering, http://www.kvocentral. com/kvopapers/7paper.pdf.Google Scholar
  15. Faltings, B. 1997‘‘Qualitative models as indices for memory-based prediction’‘IEEE Expertvol. may–june4753Google Scholar
  16. Foundations for intelligent physical agents http://www.fipa.org.Google Scholar
  17. Fikes, R. E., Nilsson, N. J. 1971‘‘STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving’‘Artificial Intelligencevols. 3–4189208Google Scholar
  18. E. A. Fox, and J. A. Shaw, ‘‘Combination of multiple searches. The second text retrieval conference (TREC-2)’’, in Government Printing Office Washinghton D.C., Gaithersburg, MD, USA, March, 1994.Google Scholar
  19. J. H. Friedman, R. kohavi, Y. Yun, ‘‘Lazy decision trees’’, in S. Howard and S. Ted (eds.), Proc. of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press pp. 717–724, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. F. Gasparetti, and A. Micarelli, ‘‘Adaptive web based on a colony de cooperative distributed agents’’, in M. Klusch. A. Omicini. S. Ossowski and H. Laama-nen (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Cooperative Information Agents. Springer-Verlag. LNAI 2782., pp. 168–183 Helsinki, August, 2003. ISBN 3-540-40798-7.Google Scholar
  21. J. A. Gonzales, L. B. Holder, and D. J. Cook, ‘‘Graph-based concept learning’’, Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Florida AI Research Symposium, pp. 377–381, 2001.Google Scholar
  22. J. H. Holland, ‘‘Escaping brittleness: The possibilities of general-purpose learning algorithms applied to parallel rule-based systems,’’ In R. S. Michalski, J. G. Carbonell, T. M. Mitchell (eds.), Machine Learning, an Artificial Intelligence Approach, Morgan Kauffman, vol 2, 1986.Google Scholar
  23. Holmes, J. H., Lanzi, P. L., Stolzman, S, Wilson, S. W. 2002‘‘Learning classifier systems New models, successful applications’‘Information Processing Letters22330ed. 1Google Scholar
  24. Java agent development framework, http://sharon.cselt.it/projects/jade/.Google Scholar
  25. Kasif, S., Salszberg, S., Waltz, D., Rachlin, J., David, , Aha,  1998‘‘A probabilistic framework for memory-based reasoning’‘Artificial Intelligence104287311Google Scholar
  26. R. Kohavi, ‘‘Bottom-up induction of oblivious read-once decision graphs: strengths and limitations,’‘Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 613--618, 1994.Google Scholar
  27. R. Kohavi, D. Sommerfield, J. Dougherty, ‘‘Data Mining using MLC++’’, in IEEE Tools With Artificial Intelligence Best Paper Award, 1996. http://robotics.stanford.edu/ ronnyk/mlc96.ps.Z.Google Scholar
  28. R. Kozierok, and P. Maes, ‘‘A learning interface agent for scheduling meetings’’, In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Workshop on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 81–88, Orlando, USA, 1993.Google Scholar
  29. Y. Lashkari, M. Metral, and P. Maes, ‘‘Collaborative interface agents’’, Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, AAAI Press, Seatle, WA, 1994.Google Scholar
  30. H. Lieberman, ‘‘Autonomous interface agents’’, Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer and Human Interface, Atlanta, March, 1997.Google Scholar
  31. H. Lieberman, ‘‘Intelligent Profiling by Example’’, Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent user Interfaces (IUI 2000), Santa Fé, January 14–17, 2001.Google Scholar
  32. P. Maes, ‘‘Learning behavior networks from experience’’, Proceedings of the First Conference on Artificial Life, F. J. Varela and P. Bourgine (in eds.) MIT Press/Bradford Books, 1992.Google Scholar
  33. P. Maes, ‘‘Modeling adaptative autonomous agents’’, Artificial Life Journal, no. 1, vol. 1–2, MIT Press, pp. 135–162, 1994.Google Scholar
  34. F. Menczer, G. Pant, P. Srinivasan, and M. E. Ruiz, ‘‘Evaluating topic-driven web crawlers’’, Proceedings of the 24th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 241–249, 2001.Google Scholar
  35. D. Michie, D. J. Spiegelhalter, and C.C. Taylor, ‘‘Machine learning, neural and statistical classification’’, Ellis Horwood, 1994, ISBN 0-13-106360-X.Google Scholar
  36. S. E. Middleton, ‘‘Interface agents: A review of the field,’‘Technical Report ECSTR-IAM01-001, University of Southampton, UK, 2001.Google Scholar
  37. Moukas, A. 1997‘‘Amalthaea information discovery and filtering using a multiagent evolving ecosystem’‘Applied Artificial Intelligence: An International Journal11437457Google Scholar
  38. Maulsby, D., Witten, I. H. 1997‘‘Teaching agents to learn: from user study to implementation’‘IEEE Computer303644Google Scholar
  39. Nilsson, N. J. 1994‘‘Teleo-reactive programs for agent control’‘Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research1139158Google Scholar
  40. Z. Z. Nick, and P. Themis, ‘‘Web search using a genetic algorithm’’, IEEE Internet Computing, pp. 18–26. March–April. 2001.Google Scholar
  41. E. Oliveira, ‘‘Agent, advanced features for negotiation and coordination,’’ M. Luck (ed.),ACAI 2001, LNAI 2086In: Springer-Verlag, pp. 173–186, 2001.Google Scholar
  42. Quinlan, J.R. 1986‘‘Induction of decision trees’’, C4.5 Programs for Machine LearningKluwer Academic PublishersNetherlands81106Google Scholar
  43. Quinlan, J.R. 1993‘‘Programs for machine learning’‘Morgan Kauffman PublishersCaliforniaC4.5Google Scholar
  44. C. K. Riesbeck, R. C. Schank, ‘‘Inside case-based reasonning’’, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, ISBN 0-89859-767-6, 423 EUA, 1989.Google Scholar
  45. G. Salton, ‘‘Automatic text processing: The transformations, analysis amd retrieval of information by computer,’‘Addison-Wesley1989.Google Scholar
  46. Sebag, M., Shoenauer, M 1990‘‘Incremental learning of rules and meta-rules’‘Porter, B.W.Mooney, R. eds. Machine LearningMorgan KaufmannLos Altos/Palo Alto/San Francisco49–57Google Scholar
  47. C.Silverstein, M. R. Henzinger, J. Marais, and M. Moricz, ‘‘Analysis of a very large altavista query log’’, ACM SIGIR, no. 33, pp. 6–12, 1999.Google Scholar
  48. R. G. Smith, ‘‘A framework for distributed problem solving’’, Proceedings of the 6th International joint Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 836–841, Tokyo, japan, 1979.Google Scholar
  49. P.E. Utgoff, ‘‘An improved algorithm for incremental induction of decision trees’’, International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 318–325, 1994.Google Scholar
  50. C. Watkins, ‘‘Learning from deplayed rewards’’, PhD Thesis, King’s College, Cambridge, 1989.Google Scholar
  51. Widyantoro, D.H., Ioerger, T.R., Yen, J. 2001‘‘Learning user interest dynamics with a three-descriptor representation’‘Journal of the American Society for Information Science52212225Google Scholar
  52. Wilson, D. R., Martinez, A. R. 2000‘‘Instance prunning techniques’‘Machine Learning38257286Google Scholar
  53. Zhang, B., Seo, Y. 2001‘‘Personalized webdocument filtering using reinforcement learning’‘Applied Artificial Intelligence15665685Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de Recherches RoyallieuUTC, Université de Technologie de Compiègne CompiègneFrance

Personalised recommendations