EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Peter McCracken
dblp:46/3944
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2006
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1
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 |
Representation and self-supervised learning · 57% Multi-agent systems · 18% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 18% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › latent representation learning › state representation learning
predictive state representation |
0.1 | 2 | 2006 | Learning predictive state representations using non-blind policies · ICML 2006 Online Discovery and Learning of Predictive State Representations · NIPS 2005 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › latent representation learning › state representation learning
latent state representation |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Online Discovery and Learning of Predictive State Representations · NIPS 2005 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › planning under uncertainty
partially observable markov decision process |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Online Discovery and Learning of Predictive State Representations · NIPS 2005 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › multi-agent coordination
team coordination |
0.1 | 1 | 2005 | Coordination and Adaptation in Impromptu Teams · AAAI 2005 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › exploration › exploration strategies
exploration policy |
0.0 | 1 | 2006 | Learning predictive state representations using non-blind policies · ICML 2006 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
spectral learning · 0.1optimization · 0.1multi-agent coordination · 0.1gradient descent · 0.1constrained optimization · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | Learning predictive state representations using non-blind policiesabstractPredictive state representations (PSRs) are powerful models of non-Markovian decision processes that differ from traditional models (e.g., HMMs, POMDPs) by representing state using only observable quantities. Because of this, PSRs can be learned solely using data from interaction with the process. The majority of existing techniques, though, explicitly or implicitly require that this data be gathered using a blind policy, where actions are selected independently of preceding observations. This is a severe limitation for practical learning of PSRs. We present two methods for fixing this limitation in most of the existing PSR algorithms: one when the policy is known and one when it is not. We then present an efficient optimization for computing good exploration policies to be used when learning a PSR. The exploration policies, which are not blind, significantly lower the amount of data needed to build an accurate model, thus demonstrating the importance of non-blind policies. 1. Michael H. Bowling, Peter McCracken, Michael R. James 0001, James Neufeld, Dana F. Wilkinson |
ICML | 2 |
| 2005 | Coordination and Adaptation in Impromptu Teams
Michael H. Bowling, Peter McCracken |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2005 | Online Discovery and Learning of Predictive State RepresentationsabstractPredictive state representations (PSRs) are a method of modeling dynamical systems using only observable data, such as actions and observations, to describe their model. PSRs use predictions about the outcome of future tests to summarize the system state. The best existing techniques for discovery and learning of PSRs use a Monte Carlo approach to explicitly estimate these outcome probabilities. In this paper, we present a new algorithm for discovery and learning of PSRs that uses a gradient descent approach to compute the predictions for the current state. The algorithm takes advantage of the large amount of structure inherent in a valid prediction matrix to constrain its predictions. Furthermore, the algorithm can be used online by an agent to constantly improve its prediction quality; something that current state of the art discovery and learning algorithms are unable to do. We give empirical results to show that our constrained gradient algorithm is able to discover core tests using very small amounts of data, and with larger amounts of data can compute accurate predictions of the system dynamics. Peter McCracken, Michael H. Bowling |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2003 | The Consolidation of Neural Network Task Knowledge
Daniel L. Silver, Peter McCracken |
ICMLA | 2 |