Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    Module 1 (Part 2)

    Uploaded by

    Komal Singh

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Module 1 (Part 2)

    Uploaded by

    Komal Singh
    2 views63 pages

    Original Title

    4. MODULE 1 (PART 2)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    2 views63 pages

    Module 1 (Part 2)

    Uploaded by

    Komal Singh

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 63

    FOUNDAMENTALS

    IN AI and ML
    CSA2001

    J. Jayanthi
    Recap…….
    • 1. Difference bw AI ML and DL -case study
    2. 15 application of AI
    3. Watch the video ( I ll send the link
    ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poLZq
    n2_dv4
    4. Deep blue ( chess case study )
    5. Limitations in AI today
    • Human agent:
    – eyes, ears, and other organs for sensors;
    – hands, legs, mouth, and other body parts for actuators

    • Robotic agent:
    – cameras and infrared range finders for sensors
    – various motors for actuators
    •agent = architecture + program
    Recap…….
    • 1. Difference bw AI ML and DL -case study
    2. 15 application of AI
    3. Watch the video ( I ll send the link
    ): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poLZq
    n2_dv4
    4. Deep blue ( chess case study )
    5. Limitations in AI today
    Recap…….
    • PEAS?- Dance Recognition softbot system
    • Rational Agent ? Four points?
    • Percept ?
    • Sensor
    • Actuators
    • Example –rational agents
    • AI Vs Ml vs Dl
    Agent Types

    1. Table-driven agent
    More 2. Simple reflex agent
    sophisticated
    3. Reflex agent with internal state
    4. Agent with explicit goals
    5. Utility-based agent
    Simple Reflex Agents: Reacting Swiftly to the Present

    Model-Based Agents: Planning for the Future

    Goal-Based Agents: Working Towards Objectives

    Utility-Based Agents: Balancing Preferences and Trade-offs

    Learning Agents: Adapting and Improving Over Time


    agent types
    • (1) Table-driven agents
    – use a percept sequence/action table in memory to find the next action. They are
    implemented by a (large) lookup table.
    • (2) Simple reflex agents
    – are based on condition-action rules, implemented with an appropriate
    production system. They are stateless devices which do not have memory of
    past world states.
    • (3) Agents with memory - Model-based reflex agents
    – have internal state, which is used to keep track of past states of the world.
    • (4) Agents with goals – Goal-based agents
    – are agents that, in addition to state information, have goal information that
    describes desirable situations. Agents of this kind take future events into
    consideration.
    • (5) Utility-based agents
    – base their decisions on classic axiomatic utility theory in order to act rationally.
    • (6) Learning agents
    – they have the ability to improve performance through learning.
    Example
    • Model-based agents, such as autonomous vehicles, are essential in
    domains where foresight is crucial. They can anticipate the behavior of
    other entities and plan optimal trajectories, making them invaluable for
    safe and efficient navigation.

    • Goal based Agent: In industries like logistics, goal-based agents optimize


    routes and distribution, minimizing costs and maximizing efficiency.

    • Utility Agent : In fields like economics and resource management,


    utility-based agents handle complex decisions, optimizing resource
    allocation based on cost, time, and quality.

    • Learning Agent: Notably, the capacity to adapt in real-time, incorporating


    fresh data and adjusting strategies, stands as a defining hallmark of these
    agents
    I) --- Table-lookup driven agents

    • Uses a percept sequence / action table in memory to


    • find the next action. Implemented as a (large) lookup table.

    Drawbacks:
    – Huge table (often simply too large)
    – Takes a long time to build/learn the table
    Table-driven agent
    function TABLE-DRIVEN-AGENT (percept) returns action
    static: percepts, a sequence, initially empty
    table, a table, indexed by percept sequences, initially fully specified

    append percept to the end of percepts


    action LOOKUP(percepts, table)
    return action

    An agent based on a prespecified lookup table. It keeps track of percept


    sequence and just looks up the best action

    • Problems
    – Huge number of possible percepts (consider an automated taxi
    with a camera as the sensor) => lookup table would be huge
    – Takes long time to build the table
    – Not adaptive to changes in the environment; requires entire table
    to be updated if changes occur
    II) --- Simple reflex agents

    Agents do not have memory of past world states or percepts.


    So, actions depend solely on current percept.
    Action becomes a “reflex.”

    Uses condition-action rules.


    III) --- Model-based reflex agents

    • Key difference (wrt simple reflex agents):

    – Agents have internal state, which is used to


    keep track of past states of the world.

    – Agents have the ability to represent change in


    the World.
    Example: Rodney Brooks’ Subsumption Architecture
    --- behavior based robots.
    Module:
    [Here] Logical Agents Model-based reflex agents
    Representation and Reasoning: Part III/IV
    R&N
    How detailed?

    “Infers potentially
    dangerous driver
    in front.”

    If “dangerous driver in front,”


    then “keep distance.”
    An example:
    Brooks’ Subsumption Architecture
    • Main idea: build complex, intelligent robots by decomposing behaviors into a
    hierarchy of skills, each defining a percept-action cycle for one very specific task.

    • Examples: collision avoidance, wandering, exploring, recognizing doorways, etc.

    • Each behavior is modeled by a finite-state machine with a few states (though


    each state may correspond to a complex function or module;
    • provides internal state to the agent).
    •
    • Behaviors are loosely coupled via asynchronous interactions.

    • Note: minimal internal state representation.


    IV) --- Goal-based agents

    • Key difference wrt Model-Based Agents:

    • In addition to state information, have goal information that


    • describes desirable situations to be achieved.

    • Agents of this kind take future events into consideration.


    • What sequence of actions can I take to achieve certain goals?

    • Choose actions so as to (eventually) achieve a (given or computed) goal.


    Module:
    Problem Solving Goal-based agents

    Considers “future”
    “Clean kitchen”

    Agent keeps track of the world state as well as set of goals it’s trying to achieve: chooses
    actions that will (eventually) lead to the goal(s).
    More flexible than reflex agents may involve search and planning
    V) --- Utility-based agents

    • When there are multiple possible alternatives, how to decide which


    one is best?

    • Goals are qualitative: A goal specifies a crude distinction between a


    happy and unhappy state, but often need a more general
    performance measure that describes “degree of happiness.”

    • Utility function U: State → R indicating a measure of success or


    happiness when at a given state.

    • Important for making tradeoffs: Allows decisions comparing choice


    between conflicting goals, and choice between likelihood of success
    and importance of goal (if achievement is uncertain).

    Use decision theoretic models: e.g., faster vs. safer.


    Utility-based agents
    • Goals alone are not enough
    ● to generate high-quality behavior
    ● E.g. meals in Canteen, good or not ?
    • Many action sequences the goals
    ● some are better and some worse
    ● If goal means success,
    ● then utility means the degree of success (how
    successful it is)
    Utility-based agents (4)
    u le: ing
    d
    Mo Mak
    i s i on
    Dec
    Utility-based agents

    Decision theoretic actions:


    e.g. faster vs. safer
    More complicated when agent needs to learn VI) --- Learning agents
    utility information: Reinforcement learning
    (based on action payoff) Adapt and improve over time

    Module:
    Learning

    “Quick turn is not safe”

    No quick turn

    Road conditions, etc


    Takes percepts
    and selects actions

    Try out the brakes on


    different road surfaces
    Summary
    • An agent perceives and acts in an environment, has an architecture, and is implemented
    by an agent program.
    • A rational agent always chooses the action which maximizes its expected performance,
    given its percept sequence so far.
    • An autonomous agent uses its own experience rather than built-in knowledge of the
    environment by the designer.
    • An agent program maps from percept to action and updates its internal state.
    – Reflex agents (simple / model-based) respond immediately to percepts.
    – Goal-based agents act in order to achieve their goal(s), possible sequence of steps.
    – Utility-based agents maximize their own utility function.
    – Learning agents improve their performance through learning.
    • Representing knowledge is important for successful agent design.
    •
    • The most challenging environments are partially observable, stochastic, sequential,
    dynamic, and continuous, and contain multiple intelligent agents.

    You might also like