Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userLifelong Testing of Smart Autonomous Systems by Shepherding a Swarm of Watchdog Artificial Intelligence Agents
68
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Hussein Abbass A
Publication date
2018
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies could be broadly categorised into Analytics and Autonomy. Analytics focuses on algorithms offering perception, comprehension, and projection of knowledge gleaned from sensorial data. Autonomy revolves around decision making, and influencing and shaping the environment through action production. A smart autonomous system (SAS) combines analytics and autonomy to understand, learn, decide and act autonomously. To be useful, SAS must be trusted and that requires testing. Lifelong learning of a SAS compounds the testing process. In the remote chance that it is possible to fully test and certify the system pre-release, which is theoretically an undecidable problem, it is near impossible to predict the future behaviours that these systems, alone or collectively, will exhibit. While it may be feasible to severely restrict such systemstextquoteright learning abilities to limit the potential unpredictability of their behaviours, an undesirable consequence may be severely limiting their utility. In this paper, we propose the architecture for a watchdog AI (WAI) agent dedicated to lifelong functional testing of SAS. We further propose system specifications including a level of abstraction whereby humans shepherd a swarm of WAI agents to oversee an ecosystem made of humans and SAS. The discussion extends to the challenges, pros, and cons of the proposed concept.
rate research
Read More
This article reviews the Once learning mechanism that was proposed 23 years ago and the subsequent successes of One-shot learning in image classification and You Only Look Once - YOLO in objective detection. Analyzing the current development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the proposal is that AI should be clearly divided into the following categories: Artificial Human Intelligence (AHI), Artificial Machine Intelligence (AMI), and Artificial Biological Intelligence (ABI), which will also be the main directions of theory and application development for AI. As a watershed for the branches of AI, some classification standards and methods are discussed: 1) Human-oriented, machine-oriented, and biological-oriented AI R&D; 2) Information input processed by Dimensionality-up or Dimensionality-reduction; 3) The use of one/few or large samples for knowledge learning.
AGVs are driverless robotic vehicles that picks up and delivers materials. How to improve the efficiency while preventing deadlocks is the core issue in designing AGV systems. In this paper, we propose an approach to tackle this problem.The proposed approach includes a traditional AGV scheduling algorithm, which aims at solving deadlock problems, and an artificial neural network based component, which predict future tasks of the AGV system, and make decisions on whether to send an AGV to the predicted starting location of the upcoming task,so as to save the time of waiting for an AGV to go to there first when the upcoming task is created. Simulation results show that the proposed method significantly improves the efficiency as against traditional method, up to 20% to 30%.
The field of machine ethics is concerned with the question of how to embed ethical behaviors, or a means to determine ethical behaviors, into artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The goal is to produce artificial moral agents (AMAs) that are either implicitly ethical (designed to avoid unethical consequences) or explicitly ethical (designed to behave ethically). Van Wynsberghe and Robbins (2018) paper Critiquing the Reasons for Making Artificial Moral Agents critically addresses the reasons offered by machine ethicists for pursuing AMA research; this paper, co-authored by machine ethicists and commentators, aims to contribute to the machine ethics conversation by responding to that critique. The reasons for developing AMAs discussed in van Wynsberghe and Robbins (2018) are: it is inevitable that they will be developed; the prevention of harm; the necessity for public trust; the prevention of immoral use; such machines are better moral reasoners than humans, and building these machines would lead to a better understanding of human morality. In this paper, each co-author addresses those reasons in turn. In so doing, this paper demonstrates that the reasons critiqued are not shared by all co-authors; each machine ethicist has their own reasons for researching AMAs. But while we express a diverse range of views on each of the six reasons in van Wynsberghe and Robbins critique, we nevertheless share the opinion that the scientific study of AMAs has considerable value.
In this paper we discuss how systems with Artificial Intelligence (AI) can undergo safety assessment. This is relevant, if AI is used in safety related applications. Taking a deeper look into AI models, we show, that many models of artificial intelligence, in particular machine learning, are statistical models. Safety assessment would then have t o concentrate on the model that is used in AI, besides the normal assessment procedure. Part of the budget of dangerous random failures for the relevant safety integrity level needs to be used for the probabilistic faulty behavior of the AI system. We demonstrate our thoughts with a simple example and propose a research challenge that may be decisive for the use of AI in safety related systems.
The design of reward functions in reinforcement learning is a human skill that comes with experience. Unfortunately, there is not any methodology in the literature that could guide a human to design the reward function or to allow a human to transfer the skills developed in designing reward functions to another human and in a systematic manner. In this paper, we use Systematic Instructional Design, an approach in human education, to engineer a machine education methodology to design reward functions for reinforcement learning. We demonstrate the methodology in designing a hierarchical genetic reinforcement learner that adopts a neural network representation to evolve a swarm controller for an agent shepherding a boids-based swarm. The results reveal that the methodology is able to guide the design of hierarchical reinforcement learners, with each model in the hierarchy learning incrementally through a multi-part reward function. The hierarchy acts as a decision fusion function that combines the individual behaviours and skills learnt by each instruction to create a smart shepherd to control the swarm.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
