Parand A. Alamdari

AI
h-index1
6papers
41citations
Novelty42%
AI Score36

6 Papers

10.0AIDec 8, 2023Code
Remembering to Be Fair: Non-Markovian Fairness in Sequential Decision Making

Parand A. Alamdari, Toryn Q. Klassen, Elliot Creager et al.

Fair decision making has largely been studied with respect to a single decision. Here we investigate the notion of fairness in the context of sequential decision making where multiple stakeholders can be affected by the outcomes of decisions. We observe that fairness often depends on the history of the sequential decision-making process, and in this sense that it is inherently non-Markovian. We further observe that fairness often needs to be assessed at time points within the process, not just at the end of the process. To advance our understanding of this class of fairness problems, we explore the notion of non-Markovian fairness in the context of sequential decision making. We identify properties of non-Markovian fairness, including notions of long-term, anytime, periodic, and bounded fairness. We explore the interplay between non-Markovian fairness and memory and how memory can support construction of fair policies. Finally, we introduce the FairQCM algorithm, which can automatically augment its training data to improve sample efficiency in the synthesis of fair policies via reinforcement learning.

5.8AINov 15, 2024
Being Considerate as a Pathway Towards Pluralistic Alignment for Agentic AI

Parand A. Alamdari, Toryn Q. Klassen, Rodrigo Toro Icarte et al.

Pluralistic alignment is concerned with ensuring that an AI system's objectives and behaviors are in harmony with the diversity of human values and perspectives. In this paper we study the notion of pluralistic alignment in the context of agentic AI, and in particular in the context of an agent that is trying to learn a policy in a manner that is mindful of the values and perspective of others in the environment. To this end, we show how being considerate of the future wellbeing and agency of other (human) agents can promote a form of pluralistic alignment.

7.3AINov 16, 2024
Pluralistic Alignment Over Time

Toryn Q. Klassen, Parand A. Alamdari, Sheila A. McIlraith

If an AI system makes decisions over time, how should we evaluate how aligned it is with a group of stakeholders (who may have conflicting values and preferences)? In this position paper, we advocate for consideration of temporal aspects including stakeholders' changing levels of satisfaction and their possibly temporally extended preferences. We suggest how a recent approach to evaluating fairness over time could be applied to a new form of pluralistic alignment: temporal pluralism, where the AI system reflects different stakeholders' values at different times.

9.4LGJul 14, 2025
Ground-Compose-Reinforce: Grounding Language in Agentic Behaviours using Limited Data

Andrew C. Li, Toryn Q. Klassen, Andrew Wang et al.

Grounding language in perception and action is a key challenge when building situated agents that can interact with humans, or other agents, via language. In the past, addressing this challenge has required manually designing the language grounding or curating massive datasets that associate language with the environment. We propose Ground-Compose-Reinforce, an end-to-end, neurosymbolic framework for training RL agents directly from high-level task specifications--without manually designed reward functions or other domain-specific oracles, and without massive datasets. These task specifications take the form of Reward Machines, automata-based representations that capture high-level task structure and are in some cases autoformalizable from natural language. Critically, we show that Reward Machines can be grounded using limited data by exploiting compositionality. Experiments in a custom Meta-World domain with only 350 labelled pretraining trajectories show that our framework faithfully elicits complex behaviours from high-level specifications--including behaviours that never appear in pretraining--while non-compositional approaches fail.

4.5AIJun 4, 2021
Be Considerate: Objectives, Side Effects, and Deciding How to Act

Parand Alizadeh Alamdari, Toryn Q. Klassen, Rodrigo Toro Icarte et al.

Recent work in AI safety has highlighted that in sequential decision making, objectives are often underspecified or incomplete. This gives discretion to the acting agent to realize the stated objective in ways that may result in undesirable outcomes. We contend that to learn to act safely, a reinforcement learning (RL) agent should include contemplation of the impact of its actions on the wellbeing and agency of others in the environment, including other acting agents and reactive processes. We endow RL agents with the ability to contemplate such impact by augmenting their reward based on expectation of future return by others in the environment, providing different criteria for characterizing impact. We further endow these agents with the ability to differentially factor this impact into their decision making, manifesting behavior that ranges from self-centred to self-less, as demonstrated by experiments in gridworld environments.

6.6LOMay 25, 2020
Formal Methods with a Touch of Magic

Parand Alizadeh Alamdari, Guy Avni, Thomas A. Henzinger et al.

Machine learning and formal methods have complimentary benefits and drawbacks. In this work, we address the controller-design problem with a combination of techniques from both fields. The use of black-box neural networks in deep reinforcement learning (deep RL) poses a challenge for such a combination. Instead of reasoning formally about the output of deep RL, which we call the {\em wizard}, we extract from it a decision-tree based model, which we refer to as the {\em magic book}. Using the extracted model as an intermediary, we are able to handle problems that are infeasible for either deep RL or formal methods by themselves. First, we suggest, for the first time, combining a magic book in a synthesis procedure. We synthesize a stand-alone correct-by-design controller that enjoys the favorable performance of RL. Second, we incorporate a magic book in a bounded model checking (BMC) procedure. BMC allows us to find numerous traces of the plant under the control of the wizard, which a user can use to increase the trustworthiness of the wizard and direct further training.