Jon Kleinberg
Sigal Oren
Abstract
In many settings, people exhibit behavior that is inconsistent across time---we allocate a block of time to get work done and then procrastinate, or put effort into a project and then later fail to complete it. An active line of research in behavioral economics and related fields has developed and analyzed models for this type of time-inconsistent behavior.
Here we propose a graph-theoretic model of tasks and goals, in which dependencies among actions are represented by a directed graph, and a time-inconsistent agent constructs a path through this graph. We first show how instances of this path-finding problem on different input graphs can reconstruct a wide range of qualitative phenomena observed in the literature on time-inconsistency, including procrastination, abandonment of long-range tasks, and the benefits of reduced sets of choices. We then explore a set of analyses that quantify over the set of all graphs; among other results, we find that in any graph, there can be only polynomially many distinct forms of time-inconsistent behavior; and any graph in which a time-inconsistent agent incurs significantly more cost than an optimal agent must contain a large "procrastination" structure as a minor. Finally, we use this graph-theoretic model to explore ways in which tasks can be designed to motivate agents to reach designated goals.
- Akerlof, G.A. Procrastination and obedience. American Econ. Rev.: Papers and Proc. 81 (1991).Google Scholar
- Albers, S., Kraft, D. Motivating time-inconsistent agents: A computational approach. In Intl. Conf. Web and Internet Econ. (2016). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Albers, S., Kraft, D. On the value of penalties in time-inconsistent planning. In Proc. 44th Intl. Colloq. on Automata, Languages and Programming (2017).Google Scholar
- Ariely, D., Wertenbroch, K. Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: self-control by precommitment. Psych. Sci. 13 (2002).Google Scholar
- Carstensen, P. The complexity of some problems in parametric linear and combinatorial programming. PhD thesis, U. Michigan (1983). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Diestel, R. Graph Theory, 3 edn. Springer (Berlin/Heidelberg, 2005).Google Scholar
- Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., O'Donoghue, T. Time discounting and time preference. J. Econ. Lit. 40, 2 (June 2002), 351--401.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gravin, N., Immorlica, N., Lucier, B., Pountourakis, E. Procrastination with variable present bias. In Proc. ACM Conf. Econ. Comp. (2016). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kaur, S., Kremer, M., Mullainathan, S. Self-control and the development of work arrangements. American Econ. Rev.: Papers and Proceedings 100 (2002).Google Scholar
- Kleinberg, J., Oren, S., Raghavan, M. Planning problems for sophisticated agents with present bias. In Proc. ACM Conf. Econ. Comp. (2016). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kleinberg, J., Oren, S., Raghavan, M. Planning with multiple biases. In Proc. ACM Conf. Econ. Comp. (2017). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laibson, D. Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Q. J. Econ. 112, 2 (1997), 443--478.Google Scholar
- Nikolova, E., Kelner, J.A., Brand, M., Mitzenmacher, M. Stochastic shortest paths via quasi-convex maximization. In Proc. 14th European Symposium on Algorithms (2006), 552--563. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O'Donoghue, T., Rabin, M. Doing it now or later. American Econ. Rev. 89 (1999).Google Scholar
- O'Donoghue, T., Rabin, M. Procrastination on long-term projects. J. Econ. Behav. Org. 66 (2008).Google Scholar
- Pollak, R.A. Consistent planning. Rev. Econ. Studies 35, 2 (Apr. 1968), 201--208.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Roughgarden, T. Lecture 19: Time-inconsistent planning, 2016. http://theory.stanford.edu/tim/f16/l/l19.pdf.Google Scholar
- Russell, S.L., Norvig, P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Prentice Hall (Upper Saddle River NJ, USA, 1994). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Strotz, R.H. Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization. Rev. Econ. Studies 23 (1955).Google Scholar
- Tang, P., Teng, Y., Wang, Z., Xiao, S., Xu, Y. Computational issues in time-inconsistent planning. In Proc. 31st AAAI Conf. Artificial Intelligence (2017).Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Time-inconsistent planning: a computational problem in behavioral economics
Recommendations
On the Value of Penalties in Time-Inconsistent Planning
People tend to behave inconsistently over time due to an inherent present bias. As this may impair performance, social and economic settings need to be adapted accordingly. Common tools to reduce the impact of time-inconsistent behavior are penalties ...
Time-inconsistent planning: a computational problem in behavioral economics
EC '14: Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM conference on Economics and computationIn many settings, people exhibit behavior that is inconsistent across time ' we allocate a block of time to get work done and then procrastinate, or put effort into a project and then later fail to complete it. An active line of research in behavioral ...
Computational issues in time-inconsistent planning
AAAI'17: Proceedings of the Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceTime-inconsistency refers to a paradox in decision making where agents exhibit inconsistent behaviors over time. Examples are procrastination where agents tend to postpone easy tasks, and abandonments where agents start a plan and quit in the middle. To ...
Comments