Self-assessment of one’s choices, i.e., confidence, is the topic of many decision neuroscience studies. Computational models of confidence, however, are limited to specific scenarios such as between choices with the same value. Here we present a normative framework for modeling decision confidence that is generalizable to various tasks and experimental setups. We further drive the implications of our model from both theoretical and experimental points of view. Specifically, we show that our model maps to the planning as an inference framework where the objective function is maximizing the gained reward and information entropy of the policy. Moreover, we validate our model on two different psychophysics experiments and show its superiority over other approaches in explaining subjects' confidence reports.

In collective decision making, members of a group need to coordinate their actions in order to achieve a desirable outcome. When there is no direct communication between group members, one should decide based on inferring others' intentions from their actions. The inference of others' intentions is called "theory of mind" and can involve different levels of reasoning, from a single inference on a hidden variable to considering others partially or fully optimal and reasoning about their actions conditioned on one's own actions (levels of “theory of mind”). In this paper, we present a new Bayesian theory of collective decision making based on a simple yet most commonly observed behavior: conformity. We show that such a Bayesian framework allows one to achieve any level of theory of mind in collective decision making. The viability of our framework is demonstrated on two different experiments, a consensus task with 120 subjects and a volunteer's dilemma task with 29 subjects, each with multiple conditions.

A fundamental problem in cognitive neuroscience is how humans make decisions, act, and behave in relation to other humans. Here we adopt the hypothesis that when we are in an interactive social setting, our brains perform Bayesian inference of the intentions and cooperativeness of others using probabilistic representations. We employ the framework of partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs) to model human decision making in a social context, focusing specifically on the volunteer's dilemma in a version of the classic Public Goods Game. We show that the POMDP model explains both the behavior of subjects as well as neural activity recorded using fMRI during the game. The decisions of subjects can be modeled across all trials using two interpretable parameters. Furthermore, the expected reward predicted by the model for each subject was correlated with the activation of brain areas related to reward expectation in social interactions. Our results suggest a probabilistic basis for human social decision making within the framework of expected reward maximization.

The degree of confidence in one's choice or decision is a critical aspect of perceptual decision making. Attempts to quantify a decision maker's confidence by measuring accuracy in a task have yielded limited success because confidence and accuracy are typically not equal. In this paper, we introduce a Bayesian framework to model confidence in perceptual decision making. We show that this model, based on partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDPs), is able to predict confidence of a decision maker based only on the data available to the experimenter. We test our model on two experiments on confidence-based decision making involving the well-known random dots motion discrimination task. In both experiments, we show that our model's predictions closely match experimental data. Additionally, our model is also consistent with other phenomena such as the hard-easy effect in perceptual decision making.

POMDP (Partially Observable Markov Decision Process) is a mathematical framework that models planning under uncertainty. Solving a POMDP is an intractable problem and even the state of the art POMDP solvers are too computationally expensive for large domains. This is a major bottleneck. In this paper, we propose a new heuristic, called the pairwise heuristic, that can be used in a one-step greedy strategy to find a near optimal solution for POMDP problems very quickly. This approach is a good candidate for large problems where real-time solution is a necessity but exact optimality of the solution is not vital. The pairwise heuristic uses the optimal solutions for pairs of states. For each pair of states in the POMDP, we find the optimal sequence of actions to resolve the uncertainty and to maximize the reward, given that the agent is uncertain about which state of the pair it is in. Then we use these sequences as a heuristic and find the optimal action in each step of the greedy strategy using this heuristic. We have tested our method on the available large classical test benchmarks in various domains. The resulting total reward is close to, if not greater than, the total reward obtained by other state of the art POMDP solvers, while the time required to find the solution is always much less.

We propose a novel method for solving the localization problem, particularly useful in self-similar environments. Localization is the task of determining a robot's position with little or no prior knowledge about its initial location. We introduce a computationally efficient active strategy for the localization task. The proposed method also automatically generates optimal macro actions giving the robot the ability to localize in all environments. Combining the active strategy and macro actions, the method introduces an efficient strategy for determining a robot's position in any environment where localization is possible.