Approaches to decision-making under uncertainty in the belief function framework are reviewed. Most methods are shown to blend criteria for decision under ignorance with the maximum expected utility principle of Bayesian decision theory. A distinction is made between methods that construct a complete preference relation among acts, and those that allow incomparability of some acts due to lack of information. Methods developed in the imprecise probability framework are applicable in the Dempster-Shafer context and are also reviewed. Shafer's constructive decision theory, which substitutes the notion of goal for that of utility, is described and contrasted with other approaches. The paper ends by pointing out the need to carry out deeper investigation of fundamental issues related to decision-making with belief functions and to assess the descriptive, normative and prescriptive values of the different approaches.

Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing 104, 19-35.

Poaching is considered a major driver for the population drop of key species such as tigers, elephants, and rhinos, which can be detrimental to whole ecosystems. While conducting foot patrols is the most commonly used approach in many countries to prevent poaching, such patrols often do not make the best use of the limited patrolling resources.

Unlike perfect-information games, imperfect-information games cannot be decomposed into subgames that are solved independently. Thus more computationally intensive equilibrium-finding techniques are used, and abstraction---in which a smaller version of the game is generated and solved---is essential. Endgame solving is the process of computing a (presumably) better strategy for just an endgame than what can be computationally afforded for the full game. Endgame solving has many benefits, such as being able to 1) solve the endgame in a finer information abstraction than what is computationally feasible for the full game, and 2) incorporate into the endgame actions that an opponent took that were not included in the action abstraction used to solve the full game. We introduce an endgame solving technique that outperforms prior methods both in theory and practice. We also show how to adapt it, and past endgame-solving techniques, to respond to opponent actions that are outside the original action abstraction; this significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art approach, action translation. Finally, we show that endgame solving can be repeated as the game progresses down the tree, leading to significantly lower exploitability. All of the techniques are evaluated in terms of exploitability; to our knowledge, this is the first time that exploitability of endgame-solving techniques has been measured in large imperfect-information games.

Poaching is a serious threat to the conservation of key species and whole ecosystems. While conducting foot patrols is the most commonly used approach in many countries to prevent poaching, such patrols often do not make the best use of limited patrolling resources. To remedy this situation, prior work introduced a novel emerging application called PAWS (Protection Assistant for Wildlife Security); PAWS was proposed as a game-theoretic (``security games'') decision aid to optimize the use of patrolling resources. This paper reports on PAWS's significant evolution from a proposed decision aid to a regularly deployed application, reporting on the lessons from the first tests in Africa in Spring 2014, through its continued evolution since then, to current regular use in Southeast Asia and plans for future worldwide deployment. In this process, we have worked closely with two NGOs (Panthera and Rimba) and incorporated extensive feedback from professional patrolling teams. We outline key technical advances that lead to PAWS's regular deployment: (i) incorporating complex topographic features, e.g., ridgelines, in generating patrol routes; (ii) handling uncertainties in species distribution (game theoretic payoffs); (iii) ensuring scalability for patrolling large-scale conservation areas with fine-grained guidance; and (iv) handling complex patrol scheduling constraints.

The editors have provided him with special introductory sections as a ing guide to a thorough understand of the reports.

Collusion is the practice of two or more parties deliberately cooperating to the detriment of others. While such behavior may be desirable in certain circumstances, in many it is considered dishonest and unfair. If agents otherwise hold strictly to the established rules, though, collusion can be challenging to police. In this paper, we introduce an automatic method for collusion detection in sequential games. We achieve this through a novel object, called a collusion table, that captures the effects of collusive behavior, i.e., advantage to the colluding parties, without assuming any particular pattern of behavior. We show the effectiveness of this method in the domain of poker, a popular game where collusion is prohibited.

In proof-of-payment transit systems, passengers are legally required to purchase tickets before entering but are not physically forced to do so. Instead, patrol units move about the transit system, inspecting the tickets of passengers, who face fines if caught fare evading. The deterrence of fare evasion depends on the unpredictability and effectiveness of the patrols. In this paper, we present TRUSTS, an application for scheduling randomized patrols for fare inspection in transit systems. TRUSTS models the problem of computing patrol strategies as a leader-follower Stackelberg game where the objective is to deter fare evasion and hence maximize revenue. This problem differs from previously studied Stackelberg settings in that the leader strategies must satisfy massive temporal and spatial constraints; moreover, unlike in these counterterrorism-motivated Stackelberg applications, a large fraction of the ridership might realistically consider fare evasion, and so the number of followers is potentially huge. A third key novelty in our work is deliberate simplification of leader strategies to make patrols easier to be executed. We present an efficient algorithm for computing such patrol strategies and present experimental results using real-world ridership data from the Los Angeles Metro Rail system. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department is currently carrying out trials of TRUSTS.

Statistical decision theory axiomatically assumes that the relative desirability of different options that humans perceive is well described by assigning them option-specific scalar utility functions. However, this assumption is refuted by observed human behavior, including studies wherein preferences have been shown to change systematically simply through variation in the set of choice options presented. In this paper, we show that interpreting desirability as a relative comparison between available options at any particular decision instance results in a rational theory of value-inference that explains heretofore intractable violations of rational choice behavior in human subjects. Complementarily, we also characterize the conditions under which a rational agent selecting optimal options indicated by dynamic value inference in our framework will behave identically to one whose preferences are encoded using a static ordinal utility function.

A key feature of the AAMAS conference is its emphasis on ties to real-world applications. The focus of this article is to provide a broad overview of application-focused papers published at the AAMAS 2010 and 2011 conferences. More specifically, recent applications at AAMAS could be broadly categorized as belonging to research areas of security, sustainability and safety. We outline the domains of applications, key research thrusts underlying each such application area, and emerging trends.