Inconsistent Planning: When in doubt, toss a coin!
Abstract
One of the most widespread human behavioral biases is the present bias -- the tendency to overestimate current costs by a bias factor. Kleinberg and Oren (2014) introduced an elegant graph-theoretical model of inconsistent planning capturing the behavior of a present-biased agent accomplishing a set of actions. The essential measure of the system introduced by Kleinberg and Oren is the cost of irrationality -- the ratio of the total cost of the actions performed by the present-biased agent to the optimal cost. This measure is vital for a task designer to estimate the aftermaths of human behavior related to time-inconsistent planning, including procrastination and abandonment. As we prove in this paper, the cost of irrationality is highly susceptible to the agent's choices when faced with a few possible actions of equal estimated costs. To address this issue, we propose a modification of Kleinberg-Oren's model of inconsistent planning. In our model, when an agent selects from several options of minimum prescribed cost, he uses a randomized procedure. We explore the algorithmic complexity of computing and estimating the cost of irrationality in the new model.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2112.03329,
title = {Inconsistent Planning: When in doubt, toss a coin!},
author = {Yuriy Dementiev and Fedor V. Fomin and Artur Ignatiev},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.03329},
year = {2021}
}