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

Sergei Gepshtein

dblp:58/8317 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
0000-0002-6328-7972ORCID · verified

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

Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2

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
1 paper
Reinforcement learning · 81% Multi-agent systems · 19%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › dynamic programming
approximate dynamic programming
0.212014
Prospective Optimization · Proc. IEEE 2014
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Multi-agent systems › intelligent agents
goal-directed behavior
0.112014
Prospective Optimization · Proc. IEEE 2014
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › model-based reinforcement learning › model-based planning
simulator-based planning
0.112014
Prospective Optimization · Proc. IEEE 2014

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

reinforcement learning · 0.2dynamic programming · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 Prospective Optimization with Limited Resources
abstract
The future is uncertain because some forthcoming events are unpredictable and also because our ability to foresee the myriad consequences of our own actions is limited. Here we studied how humans select actions under such extrinsic and intrinsic uncertainty, in view of an exponentially expanding number of prospects on a branching multivalued visual stimulus. A triangular grid of disks of different sizes scrolled down a touchscreen at a variable speed. The larger disks represented larger rewards. The task was to maximize the cumulative reward by touching one disk at a time in a rapid sequence, forming an upward path across the grid, while every step along the path constrained the part of the grid accessible in the future. This task captured some of the complexity of natural behavior in the risky and dynamic world, where ongoing decisions alter the landscape of future rewards. By comparing human behavior with behavior of ideal actors, we identified the strategies used by humans in terms of how far into the future they looked (their "depth of computation") and how often they attempted to incorporate new information about the future rewards (their "recalculation period"). We found that, for a given task difficulty, humans traded off their depth of computation for the recalculation period. The form of this tradeoff was consistent with a complete, brute-force exploration of all possible paths up to a resource-limited finite depth. A step-by-step analysis of the human behavior revealed that participants took into account very fine distinctions between the future rewards and that they abstained from some simple heuristics in assessment of the alternative paths, such as seeking only the largest disks or avoiding the smaller disks. The participants preferred to reduce their depth of computation or increase the recalculation period rather than sacrifice the precision of computation.
Joseph Snider, Dongpyo Lee, Howard Poizner, Sergei Gepshtein
PLoS Comput. Biol.4
2014 Prospective Optimization
abstract
Human performance approaches that of an ideal observer and optimal actor in some perceptual and motor tasks. These optimal abilities depend on the capacity of the cerebral cortex to store an immense amount of information and to flexibly make rapid decisions. However, behavior only approaches these limits after a long period of learning while the cerebral cortex interacts with the basal ganglia, an ancient part of the vertebrate brain that is responsible for learning sequences of actions directed toward achieving goals. Progress has been made in understanding the algorithms used by the brain during reinforcement learning, which is an online approximation of dynamic programming. Humans also make plans that depend on past experience by simulating different scenarios, which is called prospective optimization. The same brain structures in the cortex and basal ganglia that are active online during optimal behavior are also active offline during prospective optimization. The emergence of general principles and algorithms for goal-directed behavior has consequences for the development of autonomous devices in engineering applications.
Terrence J. Sejnowski, Howard Poizner, Gary Lynch, Sergei Gepshtein, Ralph J. Greenspan
Proc. IEEE4