Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Monte-Carlo tree search for Bayesian reinforcement learning

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bayesian model-based reinforcement learning can be formulated as a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) to provide a principled framework for optimally balancing exploitation and exploration. Then, a POMDP solver can be used to solve the problem. If the prior distribution over the environment’s dynamics is a product of Dirichlet distributions, the POMDP’s optimal value function can be represented using a set of multivariate polynomials. Unfortunately, the size of the polynomials grows exponentially with the problem horizon. In this paper, we examine the use of an online Monte-Carlo tree search (MCTS) algorithm for large POMDPs, to solve the Bayesian reinforcement learning problem online. We will show that such an algorithm successfully searches for a near-optimal policy. In addition, we examine the use of a parameter tying method to keep the model search space small, and propose the use of nested mixture of tied models to increase robustness of the method when our prior information does not allow us to specify the structure of tied models exactly. Experiments show that the proposed methods substantially improve scalability of current Bayesian reinforcement learning methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Algorithm 1
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Asmuth J, Li L, Littman ML, Nouri A, Wingate D (2009) A Bayesian sampling approach to exploration in reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the 25th conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (UAI-09)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Asmuth J, Littman ML (2011) Learning is planning: near Bayes-optimal reinforcement learning via Monte-Carlo tree search. In: Proceedings of the twenty-seventh conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence, pp 19–26

    Google Scholar 

  3. Auer P, Cesa-Bianchi N, Fischer P (2002) Finite-time analysis of the multiarmed bandit problem. Mach Learn 47(2–3):235–256

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Baxter J, Tridgell A, Weaver L (2000) Learning to play chess using temporal differences. Mach Learn 40(3):243–263

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Brafman RI, Tennenholtz M (2002) R-max—a general polynomial time algorithm for near-optimal reinforcement learning. J Mach Learn Res 3:213–231

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Castro PS, Precup D (2007) Using linear programming for Bayesian exploration in Markov decision processes. In: IJCAI 2007. Proceedings of the 20th international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Hyderabad, India, January 6–12, 2007, pp 2437–2442

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dearden R, Friedman N, Russell SJ (1998) Bayesian Q-learning. In: Proceedings of the fifteenth national conference on artificial intelligence and tenth innovative applications of artificial intelligence conference, AAAI/IAAI 98, Madison, WI, USA, July 26–30, 1998, pp 761–768

    Google Scholar 

  8. Duff M (2002) Optimal learning: computational procedures for Bayes-adaptive Markov decision processes. PhD thesis, University of Massassachusetts Amherst

  9. Engel Y, Mannor S, Meir R (2003) Bayes meets bellman: the Gaussian process approach to temporal difference learning. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 154–161

    Google Scholar 

  10. Engel Y, Mannor S, Meir R (2005) Reinforcement learning with Gaussian processes. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 201–208

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gelly S, Silver D (2007) Combining online and offline knowledge in uct. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 273–280

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ghavamzadeh M, Engel Y (2006) Bayesian policy gradient algorithms. In: Advances in neural information processing (NIPS), pp 457–464

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ghavamzadeh M, Engel Y (2007) Bayesian actor-critic algorithms. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 297–304

    Google Scholar 

  14. Granmo OC, Glimsdal S (2012) Accelerated Bayesian learning for decentralized two-armed bandit based decision making with applications to the goore game. Appl Intell

  15. Hong J, Prabhu VV (2004) Distributed reinforcement learning control for batch sequencing and sizing in just-in-time manufacturing systems. Appl Intell 20(1):71–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hsu D, Lee WS, Rong N (2007) What makes some POMDP problems easy to approximate? In: Advances in neural information processing (NIPS)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Iglesias A, Martínez P, Aler R, Fernández F (2009) Learning teaching strategies in an adaptive and intelligent educational system through reinforcement learning. Appl Intell 31(1):89–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kakade S, Kearns MJ, Langford J (2003) Exploration in metric state spaces. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 306–312

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kearns MJ, Singh SP (2002) Near-optimal reinforcement learning in polynomial time. Mach Learn 49(2–3):209–232

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Kocsis L, Szepesvári C (2006) Bandit based Monte-Carlo planning. In: European conference on machine learning (ECML), pp 282–293

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kolter JZ, Ng AY (2009) Near-Bayesian exploration in polynomial time. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), p 65

    Google Scholar 

  22. Li J, Li Z, Chen J (2011) Microassembly path planning using reinforcement learning for improving positioning accuracy of a 1 cm3 omni-directional mobile microrobot. Appl Intell 34(2):211–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pakizeh E, Palhang M, Pedram MM (2012) Multi-criteria expertness based cooperative Q-learning. Appl Intell

  24. Poupart P, Vlassis NA, Hoey J, Regan K (2006) An analytic solution to discrete Bayesian reinforcement learning. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 697–704

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ross S, Chaib-draa B, Pineau J (2007) Bayes-adaptive POMDPs. In: Advances in neural information processing (NIPS)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ross S, Pineau J (2008) Model-based Bayesian reinforcement learning in large structured domains. In: Proceedings of the 24th conference in uncertainty in artificial intelligence, pp 476–483

    Google Scholar 

  27. Russell SJ, Norvig P (2003) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  28. Samuel AL (1959) Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM J Res Dev 3(3):210–229

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Silver D, Veness J (2010) Monte-Carlo planning in large POMDPs. In: Advances in neural information processing (NIPS), pp 2164–2172

    Google Scholar 

  30. Singh SP, Bertsekas D (1996) Reinforcement learning for dynamic channel allocation in cellular telephone systems. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, vol NIPS, pp 974–980

    Google Scholar 

  31. Strehl AL, Littman ML (2008) An analysis of model-based interval estimation for Markov decision processes. J Comput Syst Sci 74(8):1309–1331

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Strens MJA (2000) A Bayesian framework for reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the seventeenth international conference on machine learning (ICML 2000). Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA, June 29–July 2, 2000, pp 943–950

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  34. Szita I, Szepesvári C (2010) Model-based reinforcement learning with nearly tight exploration complexity bounds. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 1031–1038

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tesauro G (1992) Practical issues in temporal difference learning. Mach Learn 8:257–277

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Tesauro G (1994) Td-gammon, a self-teaching backgammon program, achieves master-level play. Neural Comput 6(2):215–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Tesauro G (1995) Temporal difference learning and td-gammon. Commun ACM 38(3):58–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Vien NA, Viet NH, Lee S, Chung T (2009) Policy gradient SMDP for resource allocation and routing in integrated services networks. IEICE Trans 92-B(6):2008–2022

    Google Scholar 

  39. Vien NA, Yu H, Chung T (2011) Hessian matrix distribution for Bayesian policy gradient reinforcement learning. Inf Sci 181(9):1671–1685

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Walsh TJ, Goschin S, Littman ML (2010) Integrating sample-based planning and model-based reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the twenty-fourth AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI 2010), Atlanta, GA, USA, July 11–15, 2010, pp 11–15

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wang T, Lizotte DJ, Bowling MH, Schuurmans D (2005) Bayesian sparse sampling for on-line reward optimization. In: International conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 956–963

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zhang W, Dietterich TG (1995) A reinforcement learning approach to job-shop scheduling. In: International joint conferences on artificial intelligence, pp 1114–1120

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Collaborative Center of Applied Research on Service Robotics (ZAFH Servicerobotik, http://www.zafh-servicerobotik.de) and the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2010-0012609).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Ravensburg-Weingarten University of Applied Sciences, Weingarten, 88250, Germany

    Ngo Anh Vien & Wolfgang Ertel

  2. Research and Development Center for Science and Technology, DuyTan University, Da Nang, Vietnam

    Viet-Hung Dang

  3. Department of Computer Engineering, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea

    TaeChoong Chung

Authors
  1. Ngo Anh Vien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wolfgang Ertel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Viet-Hung Dang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. TaeChoong Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ngo Anh Vien.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vien, N.A., Ertel, W., Dang, VH. et al. Monte-Carlo tree search for Bayesian reinforcement learning. Appl Intell 39, 345–353 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-012-0416-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-012-0416-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation