Inconsistent Planning: When in Doubt, Toss a Coin!
Abstract
One of the most widespread human behavioral biases is the present bias -- the tendency to overestimate current costs by a bias factor. Kleinberg and Oren (2014) introduced an elegant graph-theoretical model of inconsistent planning capturing the behavior of a present-biased agent accomplishing a set of actions. The essential measure of the system introduced by Kleinberg and Oren is the cost of irrationality -- the ratio of the total cost of the actions performed by the present-biased agent to the optimal cost. This measure is vital for a task designer to estimate the aftermaths of human behavior related to time-inconsistent planning, including procrastination and abandonment. As we prove in this paper, the cost of irrationality is highly susceptible to the agent's choices when faced with a few possible actions of equal estimated costs. To address this issue, we propose a modification of Kleinberg-Oren's model of inconsistent planning. In our model, when an agent selects from several options of minimum prescribed cost, he uses a randomized procedure. We explore the algorithmic complexity of computing and estimating the cost of irrationality in the new model.
Cite
Text
Dementiev et al. "Inconsistent Planning: When in Doubt, Toss a Coin!." AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2022. doi:10.1609/AAAI.V36I9.21207Markdown
[Dementiev et al. "Inconsistent Planning: When in Doubt, Toss a Coin!." AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2022.](https://mlanthology.org/aaai/2022/dementiev2022aaai-inconsistent/) doi:10.1609/AAAI.V36I9.21207BibTeX
@inproceedings{dementiev2022aaai-inconsistent,
title = {{Inconsistent Planning: When in Doubt, Toss a Coin!}},
author = {Dementiev, Yuriy and Fomin, Fedor V. and Ignatiev, Artur},
booktitle = {AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence},
year = {2022},
pages = {9724-9731},
doi = {10.1609/AAAI.V36I9.21207},
url = {https://mlanthology.org/aaai/2022/dementiev2022aaai-inconsistent/}
}