radar – scheduling task

22
1 RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University RADAR – Scheduling Task May 20, 2003 Manuela Veloso, Stephen Smith, Jaime Carbonell, Brett Browning, (Jay Modi, Eugene Fink)

Upload: tarika

Post on 22-Jan-2016

28 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

RADAR – Scheduling Task. May 20, 2003. Manuela Veloso, Stephen Smith, Jaime Carbonell, Brett Browning, (Jay Modi, Eugene Fink). The Challenge. Main Functions -- Calendar Management Respond to meeting requests (extracted from ongoing email stream) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: RADAR – Scheduling Task

1RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

RADAR – Scheduling Task

May 20, 2003

Manuela Veloso, Stephen Smith,

Jaime Carbonell, Brett Browning,

(Jay Modi, Eugene Fink)

Page 2: RADAR – Scheduling Task

2RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

The Challenge

• Main Functions -- Calendar Management» Respond to meeting requests (extracted from ongoing email stream)

» Initiate meetings requests and establish meetings

» Continuously acquire user preferences and negotiation profiles

• Why not yet available » Requires capture and use of complex, ill-structured user preferences

» Continuous scheduling

» Management of rich multi-threaded information exchange under conflicting constraints and preferences

• Why now» Explore collaborative, user + EPCA, scheduling

» Build upon integration of many leading technologies, I.e., information extraction, constraint satisfaction, iterative scheduling

» Log, analyze, learn profiles to incrementally improve scheduling

Page 3: RADAR – Scheduling Task

3RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Calendar Scheduling is Complicated

• Meeting constraints may be hard to satisfy, requiring counter proposals, or relaxing, or negotiation

• Pre-emption of a meeting can cause a ripple effect

• Users do not put all commitments in their calendars

• It may be necessary to secure additional resources (e.g., room, projection facilities)

• Preferences and interaction protocols will vary according to context and participants involved

• There may be several meeting requests in various stages of commitment at any given time

Page 4: RADAR – Scheduling Task

4RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Diversity and Complexity

• Can we meet tomorrow at 10am?

• Can we meet with Pat some time this week?

• The admissions committee needs to meet every week until the end of February.

• The interested teaching AI faculty need to meet to schedule the courses for the Fall.

• We should arrange an AI retreat, as the one we did a few years ago.

Templates

Page 5: RADAR – Scheduling Task

5RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

The Approach

Email Stream

User

KnowledgeBase

LearningProcesses

ExtractorMessage Stream

Email Stream

Preferencesand Profiles

EditorCalendarDisplay

SchedulerManager

Need for “Sliding Autonomy”

Page 6: RADAR – Scheduling Task

6RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Scheduler: Responding to a Request

Request: Template, T» When: Thursday 15th» Duration: 1 hour» Who: Visiting Researcher

(Priority: “medium”)» Where: 1502E NSH

Response, R:» 4:00 - 6:00

Infeasible

Commited Pending

11:00 - 12:30

2:00 - 3:00

4:00 -

Policy preference:Avoid lunch hour

Pending reservation but lower priority

… but would 1/2 hour be sufficient?

Generate Options

Evaluate Options

Preference Order:4:00 - 6:002:00 - 3:00

11:00- 12:00

Threshold

Page 7: RADAR – Scheduling Task

7RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela’s Calendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Time

Meeting request for blocked time

12pm

2pm

4pm

Student, Steve10am

Confirmed Pending

Page 8: RADAR – Scheduling Task

8RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela’s Calendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

Time

Conflict: try rescheduling

12pm

2pm

4pm

Student, Steve10am

Confirmed Pending

Raj

Student, Steve

Page 9: RADAR – Scheduling Task

9RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Steve’sCalendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

Time

Student12pm

2pm

4pm

Student, Manuela10am

Confirmed Pending

Conflict: try rescheduling

Student, Manuela

Page 10: RADAR – Scheduling Task

10RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Student’s Calendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

12pmokay

Time

12pm

2pm

4pm

Manuela, Steve10am

Confirmed Pending

No conflict Manuela, Steve

Page 11: RADAR – Scheduling Task

11RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela’s Calendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

12pmokay

4pm?

Time

Another meeting 12pm

2pm

4pm

Student, Steve10am

Confirmed Pending

Raj

Brett

Student, Steve

Page 12: RADAR – Scheduling Task

12RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

12pmokay

4pm?

2-4pm better

Time

Rescheduling difficult: suggest an alternative Steve’s

Calendar

Student 12pm

2pm

4pm

Student, Manuela10am

Confirmed Pending

Student, Manuela

Student, Manuela

Page 13: RADAR – Scheduling Task

13RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela’s Calendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

12pmokay

4pm?

2-4pm better 2pm?

Time

Choose best alternative 12pm

2pm

4pm

Student, Steve10am

Confirmed Pending

Raj

Brett

Student, Steve

Page 14: RADAR – Scheduling Task

14RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Student’s Calendar

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

12pmokay

4pm?

2-4pm better 2pm?

2pmokay

Time

Pending 12pm

2pm

4pm

Manuela, Steve10am

Confirmed Pending

Manuela, Steve

Page 15: RADAR – Scheduling Task

15RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager: Multi-Thread Processing

Manuela’s Calendar

Manuela

Raj

Student

Steve

10am?

Resch. 12pm?

12pmokay

4pm?

2-4pm better 2pm?

2pmokay

2pmconfirmed

10amconfirmed

Time

12pm

Student, Steve2pm

4pm

Raj10am

Confirmed Pending

Brett

Confirmed

Page 16: RADAR – Scheduling Task

16RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Main Tasks

• RESPONDING to a request for availability » Multi-thread conflicting:

– request, availability, response, reschedule

• INITIATING organizing a meeting» Request meeting» Collect replies» Merge and solve scheduling» Until solution is found

• LEARNING» Priorities, contexts, profiles

Page 17: RADAR – Scheduling Task

17RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager and Scheduler

Manager

EmailExtractor

EmailGenerator

Scheduler

Knowledge Base

• Preferences• Profiles

R*

T T … T

T

Pending

T …

…History

mtg i

T

Page 18: RADAR – Scheduling Task

18RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Manager and Scheduler

Manager

EmailExtractor

EmailGenerator

Scheduler

Knowledge Base

T

Pending

T …

mtg i+1 ……

History

mtg i

T

R*

T T … T

T’

Page 19: RADAR – Scheduling Task

19RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

The Science

• Algorithms» Dynamic, incremental constraint-based reasoning

» Priority-, preference-driven minimum disruption optimization

• Main open questions» How to effectively computer assist a user in calendar management?

» How to represent and exploit an ill-structured set of calendar scheduling preferences and profiles?

» How to learn these preferences and profiles from episodic logging?

• Novel ideas for open questions» Collaborative meeting scheduling based on context and history

– Acquired preferences in different contexts

– Acquired beliefs of scheduling preferences of others

– Determination of profiles for management

» Use of learned profiles to overcome user burden managing calendar

» Direct, closed loop integration with user email stream

Page 20: RADAR – Scheduling Task

20RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

Learning

• Accumulation of episodes

• Control learning – State/action models

• Probabilistic dependencies

• Statistical strategy selection

• Multiagent learning

Page 21: RADAR – Scheduling Task

21RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

The Impact

• Scientific advances» Continuous mixed-initiative scheduling

» Multi-threaded process management and logging

» Learning of interaction preferences and profiles

» Seamless integration of scheduler, manager, learner

• Performance» Full implementation – RADAR improves user’s activity

• GEMs – Generalized modules for similar activity management – extend to space task

Page 22: RADAR – Scheduling Task

22RADAR – Scheduling Task © 2003 Carnegie Mellon University

The Plan

• Next Steps» Collecting data from the team

» Templates as a stub for email extractor

» Representation of scheduling preferences and profiles

» Assemble architecture:

– Scheduler, manager, knowledge base, user, learner

» Scheduling engine

» Logging of scheduling process

• Long Run» Learning over collected data

» Development of protocols and algorithms for distributed resolution of scheduling conflicts

» Multiagent collaboration and sharing among EPCAs