1 / 18

OR II GSLM 52800

OR II GSLM 52800. Discounted Problem. the value of $1 in period n +1 is only $, 0 <  < 1, of period n. solvable, M +1 equations, M +1 unknowns. Evaluating the Expected Value of a Fixed Policy.  = 0.9

ezhno
Download Presentation

OR II GSLM 52800

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. OR IIGSLM 52800 1

  2. 2

  3. Discounted Problem • the value of $1 in period n+1 is only$, 0 <  < 1, of period n solvable, M+1 equations, M+1 unknowns 3

  4. Evaluating the Expected Value of a Fixed Policy •  = 0.9 • the optimal policy for long-term average cost: do nothing at states 0 and 1, overhaul at state 2, and replace at state 3 4

  5. Policy Improvement • the improvement over a given policy • similar procedure to MDP for long-term average cost 5

  6. Policy Improvement • 1 Value Determination: Fix policy R. Solve • 2 Policy Improvement: For each state i, find action k as argument minimum of • 3 Form a new policy from actions in 2. Stop if this policy is the same as R; else go to 1 6

  7. Policy Improvement • can be proven • vi(Rn+1)  vi(Rn), for all i, n • the algorithm stops in finite number of iterations 7

  8. Example • Iteration 1: • Policy Improvement • nothing can be done at state 0 and machine must be replaced at state 3 • possible decisions at • state 1: decision 1 (do nothing, $1000) decision 3 (replace, $6000) • state 2: decision 1 (do nothing, $3000) decision 2 (overhaul, $4000) decision 3 (replace, $6000) 8

  9. Example • Iteration 1: • Policy Improvement minimum 9

  10. Example • policy: do nothing at states 0 and 1, overhaul at state 2, and replace at state 3 • no change in policy, i.e., optimum 10

  11. Linear Programming Approach • yik = discounted expected time being in state i and adopting decision k • j = initial probability at state j • expected total discounted cost depends on {j}, though the minimum policy does not 11

  12. Linear Programming Approach • choose jsuch that • solve 12

  13. Linear Programming Approach • take j = 1/4 13

  14. Successive Approximation • the policy is defined by the argument minimum of the recursive equations • stop when the policy converges 14

  15. Successive Approximation • Iteration 1 15

  16. Successive Approximation • Iteration 2 policy: do nothing at states 0 and 1, overhaul at state 2, and replace at state 3; no change  optimal 16

  17. Successive Approximation • Iteration 3 policy converged: do nothing at states 0 and 1, overhaul at state 2, and replace at state 3 17

  18. 18

More Related