diff --git a/config.toml b/config.toml index f069ea5..c0fb52e 100644 --- a/config.toml +++ b/config.toml @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ mediaTypes = ['^application/json'] author = "Brandon Rozek" avatar = "avatar.jpg" favicon = "favicon.ico" - description = "Computer Science PhD Candidate @ RPI, Writer of Tidbits, and Linux Enthusiast" + description = "PhD Student @ RPI, Writer of Tidbits, and Linux Enthusiast" email = "brozek@brandonrozek.com" identities = [ "https://github.com/brandon-rozek", diff --git a/content/research/_index.md b/content/research/_index.md index bbdef31..bd6d35a 100644 --- a/content/research/_index.md +++ b/content/research/_index.md @@ -7,36 +7,25 @@ Description: A list of my research Projects **Broad Research Interests:** Automated Reasoning, Automated Planning, Artificial Intelligence, Formal Methods -Currently, I'm a Computer Science PhD Candidate at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. I enjoy using logic-based techniques and designing algorithms to solve problems. - -Jump to: -- [Planning under uncertainty](#planning-under-uncertainty) -- [Logic](#logic) -- [Symbolic Methods for Cryptography](#symbolic-methods-for-cryptography) - ## Planning under Uncertainty -My dissertation topic is on automatically finding and recognizing plans -when agents are uncertain about the environment but can compare the -uncertainty between events *qualitatively*. For example, it is totally -expected when we stack a block that it stays on the top. However, there is a -smaller likelihood that the block falls off. -How can we best make use of this qualitative uncertainty? -- Agents when operating under uncertainty will seek plans which maximize the likelihood of their goals. -I designed an algorithm for recognizing these plans under qualitative possibility theory. This work is supervised under [Selmer Bringsjord](https://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/selmerbringsjord.html) (Paper to be released soon) -- Additionally with Selmer Bringsjord in the [RAIR Lab](https://rair.cogsci.rpi.edu/), I created a framework that captures -situations where agents are able to bucket the likelihood of facts within their environment. I then provide an effective -techinque for using classical planners to find plans which maximize the agent's likelihood of success. ([Paper](/paper/2406.02)) -- In the RAIR Lab, I also further developed [Spectra](https://github.com/rairlab/spectra) -- -an automated planner built on automated theorem proving. I showed how a class of problems -under uncertainty can be easily encoded and wrote a question-answer algorithm -for ShadowProver so that Spectra can find plans under epistemic uncertainty. ([Paper](/paper/2405.01/)) +During my PhD I have been primarily focused on investigating planning and sequential decision +making under uncertainty: +- I created a new framework which allows agents to make plans under *qualitative uncertainty*. +This helps in settings where the user doesn't have exact probabilities that various +facts holds, but can instead bucket them into different likelihood values. +This work is supervised under [Selmer Bringsjord](https://homepages.rpi.edu/~brings/). +- Additionally with Selmer Bringsjord in the [RAIR Lab](https://rair.cogsci.rpi.edu/), I have looked at planning through automated reasoning. +I further developed [Spectra](https://github.com/rairlab/spectra) and the underlying +planning with formulas framework to show classes of uncertainty problems that +are easy to encode. Additionally, I wrote a QA algorithm for ShadowProver to integrate to Spectra +for planning under epistemic uncertatinty. - With [Junkyu Lee](https://researcher.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=ibm-Junkyu.Lee), [Michael Katz](https://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=ibm-Michael.Katz1), [Harsha Kokel](https://harshakokel.com/), and [Shirin Sohrabi](https://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-ssohrab) at IBM I developed an algorithm -for guiding hierarchical reinforcement agents under partial observability. Specifically, -I focused on situations where the agent knows what they don't know and compiled that knowledge -so that a fully-observable non-deterministic planner can decompose the overall problem. ([Paper](/paper/2406.01)) +for guiding hiearchical reinforcement agents under partial observability when domain knowledge +can be encoded for characterizing discovery of unknown predicates. + ## Logic @@ -57,7 +46,7 @@ Related Notes: - [Automated Theorem Proving](atp/) - [Term Reasoning](termreasoning/) - + ## Symbolic Methods for Cryptography Worked with [Andrew Marshall](https://www.marshallandrew.net/) and others in applying term reasoning within computational logic @@ -84,11 +73,6 @@ Collaborators: Group Website: [https://cryptosolvers.github.io](https://cryptosolvers.github.io) ---- - -**Note:** From this point on, the projects listed happened over 5 years ago. - ---- ## Reinforcement Learning