380 likes | 462 Views
On the Role of Multiply Sectioned Bayesian Networks to Cooperative Multiagent Systems. Presented By: Yasser EL-Manzalawy. Reference.
E N D
On the Role of Multiply Sectioned BayesianNetworks to Cooperative Multiagent Systems Presented By: Yasser EL-Manzalawy
Reference • Y. Xiang and V. Lesser, On the Role of Multiply Sectioned Bayesian Networks to Cooperative Multiagent Systems. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A, Vol.33, No.4, 489-501, 2003
Structure of the presentation • Motivation • Introduction of the background knowledge • Detail information about the constraints • A small set of high level choices • How those choices logically imply all the constraints
Motivation • What’s an agent? • Program that takes sensory input from the environment, and produces output actions that affect it. • If the agent works in uncertain environment, then the agent can represent its believes about the environment as a Bayesian Network.
Motivation • What’s a Multi-Agent System (MAS)? • Multi-Agent System is a set of agents and the environment they interact. Agent environment Agent Agent Agent Agent Agent
Motivation • In MAS, each agent can only observe and reason about a subdomain. • Agents are assumed to cooperate in order to achieve a common global goal. • For uncertain domains, agent believes can be represented as a BN (subnet). Several Issues Arise!
Motivation • How should the domain be partitioned into subdomains? • How should each agent represent its knowledge about a subdomain? • How should the knowledge of each agent relate to that of others? • How should the agents be organized in their activities? • What information should they exchange and how, in order to accomplish their task with a limited amount of communication? • Can they achieve the same level of accuracy in estimating the state of the domain as that of a single centralized agent?
Motivation • MSBN provides a solution to these issues. • Applying MSBN implies some technical constraints. Are these constraints necessary?
Introduction and Background • Definition: A Bayesian Network is a triplet (V,G,P) where V is a set of domain variables, G is a DAG whose nodes are labeled by elements of V , and P is a joint probability distribution (jpd) over V, specified in terms of a distribution for each variable conditioned on the parents of in G.
Introduction and Background • Definition: Let G = (V,E) be a connected graph sectioned into subgraphs . Let the subgraphs be organized into an undirected tree where each node is uniquely labeled by a and each link between and is labeled by the non-empty interface such that for each and , is contained in each subgraph on the path between and in . Then is a hypertree over G. Each is a hypernode and each interface is a hyperlink.
Introduction and Background hypernode a, b hyperlink
Introduction and Background • Definition: Let G be a directed graph such that a hypertree over G exists. A node contained in more than one subgraph with its parents in G is a d-sepnode if there exists at least one subgraph that contains . An interface is a d-sepset if every is a d-sepnode.
Introduction and Background • Definition: A hypertree MSDAG , where each is a DAG, is a connected DAG such that (1) there exists a hypertree over , and (2) each hyperlink in is a d-sepset.
Introduction and Background • Note: DAGs in MSDAG tree may be multiply connected.
Introduction and Background • A potential over a set of variables is an non-negative distribution of at least one positive parameter. • One can always convert a potential into a conditional probability by dividing each potential value with a proper sum: an operation termed normalization. • A uniform potential is one with all its potential values being 1.
Introduction and Background • Definition: An MSBN is a triplet (V,G,P). is the domain where each is a set of variables. (a hypertree MSDAG) is the structure where nodes of each DAG are labeled by elements of . Let be a variable and be all the parents of in G. For each , exactly one of its occurrences (in a containing ) is assigned , and each occurrence in other DAGs is assigned a uniform potential. is the jpd, where each is the product of the potentials associated with nodes in . A triplet is called a subnet of M. Two subnets and are said to be adjacent if and are adjacent on the hypertree MSDAG
Introduction and Background • Communication Graph • Cluster Graph • Junction Graph • Junction Tree
Introduction and Background Cluster Separator
d,e d,e,i d,f d,f,h d d d d d d,h d d,i b,c,d b,c,d,i d,g d,g,h d d a,b a,e (a)Strong Degenerate Loop (b) Weak Degenerate Loop a e b b,c,d c,e c (c) Strong Nondegenerate Loop a,b,f a,e,f a,f e,f b,f b,c,d,f c,e,f c,f (d) Week Nondegenerate Loop Introduction and Background
High Level Choices (Basic Commitments) • BC1: Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • BC2: Ai and Aj can communicate directly only with their intersecting variables • BC3: A simpler agent organization, i.e., tree, is preferred when degenerate loops exist in the CG • BC4: A DAG is used to structure each individual agent’s knowledge • BC5: Within each agent’s subdomain, the JPD is consistent with the agent’s belief. For shared nodes, the JPD supplements each agent’s knowledge with others’
Seven Constraints • Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • The domain is decomposed into subdomains • Subdomains are organized into a hyptertree structure • The dependency structure of each subdomain is represented by a DAG • The union of DAGs for all subdomains is a connected DAG • Each hyperlink is a d-sepset • The JPD can be expressed as in definition of MSBN
A0 a,b a a,c A1 b c A2 b,c,d a b c d Figure 1 • Lemma 9: Let s be a strictly positive initial state of Mas3. There exists an infinite set S. Each element s’∈S is an initial state of Mas3 identical to s in P(a), P(b|a), P(c|a) but distinct in P(d|b,c) such that the message P2(b|d=d0) produced from s’ is identical to that produced from s, and so is the message P2(c|d=d0) Mas3: a multiagent system of 3 agents.
Proof: Denote P2(b=b0|d=d0) from state s by P2(b0|d0), P2’(b=b0|d=d0) from state s’ by P2’(b0|d0). P2(b0|d0) can be expanded as: For P2(b|d0)=P2’(b|d0), we have: Similarly, Because P2’(d|b,c) has4independent parameters but is constrained by only two equations, it has infinitely many solutions.
Lemma 10: Let P and P’ be strictly positive probability distributions over the DAG of Figure 1 such that they are identical in P(a), P(b|a) and P(c|a) but distinct in P(d|b,c). Then P(a|d=d0) is distinct from P’(a|d=d0) in general Proof: The following can be obtained from P and P’: If P(b,c|d0) ≠ P’(b,c|d0), then in general P(a|d0) ≠P’(a|d0) Because P(d|b,c) ≠P’(d|b,c), in general, it is the case that P(b,c|d0) ≠P’(b,c|d0). Do you agree???
A0 a,b a a,c A1 b c A2 b,c,d Figure 1 Theorem 11 : Message passing in Mas3 cannot be coherent in general, no matter how it is performed • Proof: • By Lemma 9, P2(b|d=d0) and P2(c|d=d0) are insensitive to the initial states and hence the posteriors P0(a|d=d0) computed from the messages can not be sensitive to the initial states either • However, by Lemma 10, the posterior should be different in general given different initial states • Hence, correct belief updating cannot be achieved in Mas3 Insight • Correct inference requires P(b,c|d0) • However, nondegenerate loop results in the passing of the marginals of P(b,c|d0), i.e., P(b|d=d0) and P(c|d=d0)
We can generalize this analysis to an arbitrary, strong nondegenerate loop of length 3 • Further generalize this analysis to an arbitrary, strong nondegenerate loop of length K ≥ 3 • Conclusion • Corollary 12: Message passing in a cluster graph with nondegenerate loops cannot be coherent in general, no matter how it is performed
Another conclusion without proof: • A cluster graph with only degenerateloops can always be treated by first breaking the loops at appropriate separators. The resultant is a clustertree • Therefore, we have: • Proposition 13: Let a multiagent system be one that observes BC 1 through BC 3. Then a tree organization of agents should be used
Five Basic Commitments • BC1: Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • BC2: Ai and Aj can communicate directly only with their intersecting variables • BC3: A simpler agent organization, i.e., tree, is preferred when degenerate loops exist in the CG • BC4: A DAG is used to structure each individual agent’s knowledge • BC5: Within each agent’s subdomain, the JPD is consistent with the agent’s belief. For shared nodes, the JPD supplements each agent’s knowledge with others’ Seven Constraints • Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • The domain is decomposed into subdomains with RIP • Subdomains are organized into a hyptertree structure • The dependency structure of each subdomain is represented by a DAG • The union of DAGs for all subdomains is a connected DAG • Each hyperlink is a d-sepset • The JPD can be expressed as in definition of MSBN
Five Basic Commitments • BC1: Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • BC2: Ai and Aj can communicate directly only with their intersecting variables • BC3: A simpler agent organization, i.e., tree, is preferred when degenerate loops exist in the CG • BC4: A DAG is used to structure each individual agent’s knowledge • BC5: Within each agent’s subdomain, the JPD is consistent with the agent’s belief. For shared nodes, the JPD supplements each agent’s knowledge with others’ Seven Constraints • Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • The domain is decomposed into subdomains with RIP • Subdomains are organized into a hyptertree structure • The dependency structure of each subdomain is represented by a DAG • The union of DAGs for all subdomains is a connected DAG • Each hyperlink is a d-sepset • The JPD can be expressed as in definition of MSBN
Proposition 17: Let a multiagent system over V be constructed following BC 1 through BC 4. Then each subdomain Vi is structured as a DAG over Vi and the union of these DAGs is a connected DAG over V • Proof: • The connectedness is implied by Proposition 6 • If the union of subdomain DAGs is not a DAG, then it has a directed loop. This contradicts the acyclic interpretation of dependence in individual DAG models
Five Basic Commitments • BC1: Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • BC2: Ai and Aj can communicate directly only with their intersecting variables • BC3: A simpler agent organization, i.e., tree, is preferred when degenerate loops exist in the CG • BC4: A DAG is used to structure each individual agent’s knowledge • BC5: Within each agent’s subdomain, the JPD is consistent with the agent’s belief. For shared nodes, the JPD supplements each agent’s knowledge with others’ Seven Constraints • Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • The domain is decomposed into subdomains with RIP • Subdomains are organized into a hyptertree structure • The dependency structure of each subdomain is represented by a DAG • The union of DAGs for all subdomains is a connected DAG • Each hyperlink is a d-sepset • The JPD can be expressed as in definition of MSBN
Theorem 18:Let Ψ be a hypertree over a directed graph G=(V, E). For each hyperlink I which splits Ψ into 2 subtrees over U V and W V respectively, U \ I and W \ I are d-separated by I iff each hyperlink in Ψ is a d-sepset • Proposition 14:Let a multiagent system be one that observes BC 1 through BC 3. Then a junction tree organization of agents must be used • Proposition 19:Let a multiagent system be constructed following BC 1 through BC 4. Then it must be structured as a hypertree MSDAG
Proof of Proposition 19: From BC 1 through BC 4, it follows that each subdomain should be structured as a DAG and the entire domain should be structured as a connected DAG (Proposition 17). The DAGs should be organized into a hypertree (Proposition 14). The interface between adjacent DAGs on the hypertree should be a d-sepset (Theorem 18). Hence, the multiagent system should be structured as a hypertree MSDAG (Definition 3)
Five Basic Commitments • BC1: Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • BC2: Ai and Aj can communicate directly only with their intersecting variables • BC3: A simpler agent organization, i.e., tree, is preferred when degenerate loops exist in the CG • BC4: A DAG is used to structure each individual agent’s knowledge • BC5: Within each agent’s subdomain, the JPD is consistent with the agent’s belief. For shared nodes, the JPD supplements each agent’s knowledge with others’ Seven Constraints • Each agent’s belief is represented by Bayesian probability • The domain is decomposed into subdomains with RIP • Subdomains are organized into a hyptertree structure • The dependency structure of each subdomain is represented by a DAG • The union of DAGs for all subdomains is a connected DAG • Each hyperlink is a d-sepset • The JPD can be expressed as in definition of MSBN
Conclusion Theorem 22:Let a multiagent system be constructed following BC 1 through BC 5. Then it must be represented as a MSBN or some equivalent.