Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Zahra Zamani

dblp:117/4865 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Reinforcement learning · 60% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 37% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 4%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
markov decision process
0.532013
Robust Optimization for Hybrid MDPs with State-Dependent Noise · IJCAI 2013
Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Observation POMDPs · NIPS 2012
Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Action MDPs · AAAI 2012
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › markov decision process
symbolic dynamic programming
0.322012
Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Observation POMDPs · NIPS 2012
Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Action MDPs · AAAI 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › planning under uncertainty
partially observable markov decision process
0.112012
Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Observation POMDPs · NIPS 2012
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › planning under uncertainty
point-based value iteration
0.112012
Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Observation POMDPs · NIPS 2012

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

robust optimization · 0.2symbolic dynamic programming · 0.1symbolic constrained optimization · 0.1point-based value iteration · 0.1extended algebraic decision diagram · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Robust Optimization for Hybrid MDPs with State-Dependent Noise
Zahra Zamani, Scott Sanner, Karina Valdivia Delgado, Leliane Nunes de Barros
IJCAI1
2012 Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Action MDPs
abstract
Many real-world decision-theoretic planning problemsare naturally modeled using both continuous state andaction (CSA) spaces, yet little work has provided ex-act solutions for the case of continuous actions. Inthis work, we propose a symbolic dynamic program-ming (SDP) solution to obtain the optimal closed-formvalue function and policy for CSA-MDPs with mul-tivariate continuous state and actions, discrete noise,piecewise linear dynamics, and piecewise linear (or re-stricted piecewise quadratic) reward. Our key contribu-tion over previous SDP work is to show how the contin-uous action maximization step in the dynamic program-ming backup can be evaluated optimally and symboli-cally — a task which amounts to symbolic constrainedoptimization subject to unknown state parameters; wefurther integrate this technique to work with an efficientand compact data structure for SDP — the extendedalgebraic decision diagram (XADD). We demonstrateempirical results on a didactic nonlinear planning exam-ple and two domains from operations research to showthe first automated exact solution to these problems.
Zahra Zamani, Scott Sanner
AAAI1
2012 Symbolic Dynamic Programming for Continuous State and Observation POMDPs
abstract
Partially-observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) provide a powerful model for real-world sequential decision-making problems. In recent years, point- based value iteration methods have proven to be extremely effective techniques for finding (approximately) optimal dynamic programming solutions to POMDPs when an initial set of belief states is known. However, no point-based work has provided exact point-based backups for both continuous state and observation spaces, which we tackle in this paper. Our key insight is that while there may be an infinite number of possible observations, there are only a finite number of observation partitionings that are relevant for optimal decision-making when a finite, fixed set of reachable belief states is known. To this end, we make two important contributions: (1) we show how previous exact symbolic dynamic pro- gramming solutions for continuous state MDPs can be generalized to continu- ous state POMDPs with discrete observations, and (2) we show how this solution can be further extended via recently developed symbolic methods to continuous state and observations to derive the minimal relevant observation partitioning for potentially correlated, multivariate observation spaces. We demonstrate proof-of- concept results on uni- and multi-variate state and observation steam plant control.
Zahra Zamani, Scott Sanner, Pascal Poupart, Kristian Kersting
NIPS1