Belief MDP

Construction of Belief MDP

Definition (Filter Process)

Consider a POMDP (X,U,Y,K,T,Q,c)(\mathbb{X}, \mathbb{U}, \mathbb{Y}, \mathbb{K},\mathcal{T}, Q,c) with control policy γ\gamma. When X,Y,U\mathbb{X},\mathbb{Y},\mathbb{U} are countable we can reduce the partially observed process to a belief-MDP where the state at time tt is πt(⋅):=P(Xt∈⋅∣y[0,t],u[0,t−1])∈P(X)\pi_{t}(\cdot):=P(X_{t}\in\cdot \mid y_{[0,t]},u_{[0,t-1]})\in\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})we call πt\pi_{t} the filter-process.

Construction of the Filter Process

Let Q(B∣x):=P(yt∈⋅∣xt=x)Q(B\mid x):=P(y_{t}\in\cdot \mid x_{t}=x) and assuming Q≪λQ\ll\lambda we define the Radon-Nikodym Derivative gg: g(x,y)=dG(yn∈⋅∣xn=x)dλ(y)g(x,y)=\frac{dG(y_{n}\in\cdot \mid x_{n}=x)}{d\lambda}(y)We can then describe πn+1\pi_{n+1} in terms of πn,yn+1,un\pi_{n},y_{n+1},u_{n} using the kernel T\mathcal{T} and gg: πn+1(dxn+1):=F(πn,yn+1,un)(dxn+1)=∫Xg(xn+1,yn+1)T(dxn+1∣xn,un) πn(dxn)∫X∫Xg(xn+1,yn+1)T(dxn+1∣xn,un) πn(dxn)\begin{align*} \pi_{n+1}(dx_{n+1})&:=F(\pi_{n},y_{n+1},u_{n})(dx_{n+1})\\\\ &=\frac{\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}g(x_{n+1},y_{n+1})\mathcal{T}(dx_{n+1}\mid x_{n},u_{n})\,\pi_{n}(dx_{n})}{\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}g(x_{n+1},y_{n+1})\mathcal{T}(dx_{n+1}\mid x_{n},u_{n}) \, \pi_{n}(dx_{n}) } \end{align*}where we integrate over dxndx_{n} in both and denominator integrates over dxn+1dx_{n+1} as well.

Transition Kernel of the Filter Process

We define the transition probability η\eta of the filter process as follows: η(⋅∣\pu,u):=∫Y1{F(π,u,y)∈⋅} P(dy∣π,u)\eta(\cdot \mid \pu{ ,u }):=\int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}\mathbb{1}_{\{ F(\pi,u,y)\in \cdot \}} \, P(dy\mid \pi,u) where F(π,u,y):=F(⋅∣y,u,π)F(\pi,u,y):=F(\cdot \mid y,u,\pi)

Cost Function of the Filter Process

Assuming we want to minimize the Finite Horizon Optimization problem Ex0γ[∑k=0N−1c(Xk,Uk)+cN(XN)]E_{x_{0}}^{\gamma}\left[ \sum_{k=0}^{N-1}c(X_{k},U_{k})+c_{N}(X_{N}) \right]we define the cost function c~:P(X)×U→[0,∞)\tilde{c}:\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})\times \mathbb{U}\to[0,\infty) as c~(π,u)=∫Xc(x,u) π(dx)\tilde{c}(\pi,u)=\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}c(x,u) \, \pi(dx) >[!thm] Filter process is a CMC >Let (X,U,Y,K,T,Q,c)(\mathbb{X}, \mathbb{U}, \mathbb{Y}, \mathbb{K},\mathcal{T}, Q,c) be a POMDP with filter process πt\pi_{t}. Then, {πt,ut}\{ \pi_{t},u_{t} \} is a Controlled Markov Chain.

Definition (Belief MDP)

Hence, the filter process πt\pi_{t} defines a completely observable MDP defined as (P(X),U,K~,η,c~)(\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X}),\mathbb{U}, \tilde{\mathbb{K}},\eta, \tilde{c})

Weak Feller Continuity of Belief MDP

Lemma (1)

Let X\mathbb{X} be a Borel space. Suppose that we have a family of uniformly bounded, real, Borel functions {fn,λ}n≥1,λ∈Λ\{ f_{n,\lambda} \}_{n\ge 1,\lambda \in\Lambda}, for some set Λ\Lambda. If, for any xn→xx_{n}\to x in X\mathbb{X} we have lim⁡n→∞sup⁡λ∈Λ∣fn,λ(xn)−fλ(x)∣=0lim⁡n→∞sup⁡λ∈Λ∣fλ(xn)−fλ(x)∣=0\begin{align*} \lim_{ n \to \infty } \sup_{\lambda \in\Lambda}\left| f_{n,\lambda}(x_{n})-f_{\lambda}(x) \right| =0\\ \lim_{ n \to \infty } \sup_{\lambda \in\Lambda}\left| f_{\lambda}(x_{n})-f_{\lambda}(x) \right| =0 \end{align*}then, for any μn→μ\mu_{n}\to\mu weakly in P(X)\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X}), we have lim⁡n→∞sup⁡λ∈Λ∣∫Xfn,λ(x) μn(dx)−∫Xfλ(x) μ(dx)∣=0\lim_{ n \to \infty } \sup_{\lambda \in\Lambda}\left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}f_{n,\lambda}(x) \, \mu_{n}(dx)-\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}f_{\lambda}(x) \, \mu(dx) \right| =0

\begin{proof} See Kara yuksel 2019 \end{proof} >[!assumption|1] >1. The transition probability T(⋅∣x,u)\mathcal{T}(\cdot\mid x,u) is weakly continuous in (x,u)(x,u). >2. The observation channel Q(⋅∣x,u)Q(\cdot\mid x,u) is continuous in total variation.

Theorem (1)

Under the transition probability η(⋅∣π,u)\eta(\cdot\mid \pi,u) of the filter process is weakly continuous in (π,u)(\pi,u).

\begin{proof} This proof consists of showing that for every (π0n,un)→(π0,u)(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})\to(\pi_{0},u) in P(X)×U\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})\times \mathbb{U} we have sup⁡∥f∥BL≤1∣∫P(X)f(π1) η(dπ1∣π0n,un)−∫P(X)f(π1) η(dπ1∣π0,u)∣→0,\sup_{\lVert f \rVert _{BL}\le 1}\left| \int\limits _{\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})}f(\pi_{1}) \, \eta(d\pi_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})-\int\limits _{\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})}f(\pi_{1}) \, \eta(d\pi_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \right| \to{0},where we equip P(X)\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X}) with the Metric ρ\rho to define the Bounded-Lipschitz Norm ∥f∥BL\lVert f \rVert_{BL} of any Borel function f:P(X)→Rf:\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})\to \mathbb{R}. We can equivalently write this as sup⁡∥f∥BL≤1∣∫Yf(π1(π0n,un,y1)) P(dy1∣π0n,un)−∫Yf(π1(π0,u,y1)) P(dy1∣π0,u)∣→0\sup_{\lVert f \rVert _{BL}\le 1}\left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n},y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n}) -\int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0},u,y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \right| \to0we can then upper bound the above term: sup⁡∥f∥BL≤1∣∫Yf(π1(π0n,un,y1)) P(dy1∣π0n,un)−∫Yf(π1(π0,u,y1)) P(dy1∣π0,u)∣≤sup⁡∥f∥BL≤1∣∫Yf(π1(π0n,un,y1)) P(dy1∣π0n,un)−∫Yf(π1(π0n,u,y1)) P(dy1∣π0,u)∣+sup⁡∥f∥BL≤1∫Y∣f(π1(π0n,un,y1))−f(π1(π0,u,y1))∣ P(dy1∣π0,u)≤∥P(⋅∣π0n,un)−P(⋅∣π0,u)∥TV+sup⁡∥f∥BL≤1∫Y∣f(π1(π0n,un,y1))−f(π1(π0,u,y1))∣ P(dy1∣π0,u)\begin{align*} &\sup_{\lVert f \rVert _{BL}\le 1}\left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n},y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n}) -\int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0},u,y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \right|\\ &\le \sup_{\lVert f \rVert _{BL}\le 1}\left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n},y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n}) -\int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u,y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \right|\\ &\quad+ \sup_{\lVert f \rVert _{BL}\le 1} \int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}\left|f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n},y_{1})) - f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0},u,y_{1})) \right| \,P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \\ &\le \lVert P(\cdot\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})-P(\cdot\mid \pi_{0},u) \rVert _{TV}+\sup_{\lVert f \rVert _{BL}\le 1} \int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}\left|f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n},y_{1})) - f(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0},u,y_{1})) \right| \,P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u)\tag{8}\\ \end{align*}where in (8)(8) we use the fact that ∥f∥∞≤∥f∥BL≤1\lVert f \rVert_{\infty}\le\lVert f \rVert_{BL}\le 1.
To prove (8)→0(8)\to0 it is sufficient to prove:

  1. P(dy1∣π0,u0)P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u_{0}) is Continuous in Total Variation
  2. (π0n,un)→(π0,u)  ⟹  ∫Yρ(π1(π0n,uny1),π1(π0,u,y1)) P(dy1∣π0,u)→0(9)(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})\to(\pi_{0},u)\implies\int\limits _{\mathbb{Y}}\rho(\pi_{1}(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n}y_{1}),\pi_{1}(\pi_{0},u,y_{1})) \, P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \to 0\tag{9}since (second term of 8)≤(9)(\text{second term of }8)\le(9). >[!claim] >P(dy1∣π0,u0)P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u_{0}) is Continuous in Total Variation

Let (π0n,un)→(π0,u)(\pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})\to(\pi_{0},u). Then sup⁡A∈B(Y)∣P(A∣π0n,un)−P(A∣π0,u)∣=sup⁡A∈B(Y)∣∫XQ(A∣x1,un) T(dx1∣π0n,un)−∫XQ(A∣x1,u) T(dx1∣z0,u)∣,\begin{align*} &\sup_{A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{Y})}\left| P(A\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})-P(A\mid \pi_{0},u) \right| \\ &=\sup_{A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{Y})}\left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}Q(A\mid x_{1},u_{n}) \, \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})-\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}Q(A\mid x_{1},u) \, \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid z_{0},u) \right| , \end{align*}where T(dx1∣π0n,un):=∫XT(dx1∣x0,un) π0n(dx0).\mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n}):=\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}\mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid x_{0},u_{n}) \, \pi_{0}^{n}(dx_{0}) .Note that, by , we can show that T(dx1∣π0n,un)→T(dx1∣π0,u)\mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})\to \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) weakly.

Indeed, let g∈Cb(X)g\in C_{b}(\mathbb{X}), then define rn(x0)=∫Xg(x1) T(dx1∣x0,un)r_{n}(x_{0})=\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}g(x_{1}) \, \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid x_{0},u_{n}) and r(x0)=∫Xg(x1) T(dx1∣x0,u)r(x_{0})=\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}g(x_{1}) \, \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid x_{0},u). Since T(dx1∣x0,u)\mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid x_{0},u) is Weak Feller, we have rn(x0)→r(x0)r_{n}(x_{0})\to r(x_{0}) when x0n→x0x_{0}^{n}\to x_{0}. Hence, by we have that lim⁡n→∞∣∫Xrn(x0) π0n(dx0)−∫Xr(x0) π0(dx0)∣\lim_{ n \to \infty } \left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}r_{n}(x_{0}) \, \pi _{0}^{n}(dx_{0})-\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}r(x_{0}) \, \pi_{0}(dx_{0}) \right| Hence T(dx1∣π0n,un)→T(dx1∣π0,u)\mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n})\to \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) weakly. Moreover the families of functions {Q(A∣⋅,un)}n≥1,A∈B(Y)\{ Q(A\mid \cdot,u_{n}) \}_{n\ge 1,A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{Y})} and {Q(A∣⋅,u)}A∈B(Y)\{ Q(A\mid \cdot,u) \}_{A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{Y})} satisfy the conditions of as QQ is Continuous in Total Variation. Therefore yields lim⁡n→∞sup⁡A∈B(Y)∣∫XQ(A∣x1,un) T(dx1∣π0n,un)−∫XQ(A∣x1,u) T(dx1∣π0,u)∣=0\lim_{ n \to \infty } \sup_{A\in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{Y})}\left| \int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}Q(A\mid x_{1},u_{n}) \, \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0}^{n},u_{n}) -\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}Q(A\mid x_{1},u) \, \mathcal{T}(dx_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) \right| =0Thus, P(dy1∣π0,u)P(dy_{1}\mid \pi_{0},u) is Continuous in Total Variation.

\end{proof}

Comparison of Conditions on Observation Channels

Theorem (3)

Suppose that the observation channel Q(dy∣x,u)Q(dy\mid x,u) is continuous in total variation. Then, for any (π,u)∈P(X)×U(\pi,u)\in\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})\times \mathbb{U}, we have, T(⋅∣π,u)\mathcal{T}(\cdot\mid \pi,u)-a.s., that Q(dy∣x,u)≪P(dy∣π,u)Q(dy\mid x,u)\ll P(dy\mid \pi,u) and Q(dy∣x,u)=g(x,u,y)P(dy∣π,u)Q(dy\mid x,u)=g(x,u,y)P(dy\mid \pi,u)for a Measurable Function gg, which satisfies for any A∈B(Y)A\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{Y}) and for any xk→xx_{k}\to x ∫A∣g(xk,u,y)−g(x,u,y)∣ P(dy∣π,u)→0.\int\limits _{A}|g(x_{k},u,y)-g(x,u,y)| \, P(dy\mid \pi,u) \to0.

\begin{proof} We begin by fixing any (π,u)∈P(X)×U(\pi,u)\in\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{X})\times \mathbb{U}. >[!clm] >Q(dy∣x,u)≪P(dy∣π,u), T(⋅∣π,u)-a.s.Q(dy\mid x,u)\ll P(dy\mid \pi,u),\,\mathcal{T}(\cdot\mid \pi,u)\text{-a.s.}

Note that (by definition of Absolute Continuity) Q(dy∣x,u)≪P(dy∣π,u)Q(dy\mid x,u)\ll P(dy\mid \pi,u) if and only if ∀ϵ>0,∃δ>0:P(A∣π,u)<δ  ⟹  Q(A∣x,u)<ϵ\forall\epsilon>0,\exists\delta>0:P(A\mid \pi,u)<\delta\implies Q(A\mid x,u)<\epsilonFor each n≥1n\ge 1 let Kn⊂XK_{n}\subset\mathbb{X} be Compact such that T(Kn∣π,u)>1−13n\mathcal{T}(K_{n}\mid \pi,u)>1-\frac{1}{3n}which can be done due to Prokhorov (i.e. since T\mathcal{T} is Weak Feller then it is necessarily Relatively Compact hence it is also Tight.

As Q(dy∣x,u)Q(dy\mid x,u) is continuous in total variation, the Image of Kn×{u}K_{n}\times \{ u \} under Q(dy∣x,u)Q(dy\mid x,u) is compact in P(Y)\mathcal{P}(\mathbb{Y}) (this is by Heine-Borel Theorem). Hence, there exists {ν1,…,νl}⊂P(Y)\{ \nu_{1},\dots,\nu_{l} \}\subset \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{Y}) such that max⁡x∈Knmin⁡i=1,…,l∥Q(⋅∣x,u)−νi∥TV<13n\max_{x \in K_{n}}\min_{i=1,\dots,l}\lVert Q(\cdot\mid x,u)-\nu_{i} \rVert _{TV}< \frac{1}{3n} Define the following Stochastic Kernel: νn(⋅∣x,u)=arg⁡min⁡νi∥Q(⋅∣x,u)−νi∥TV\nu_{n}(\cdot\mid x,u)=\underset{ \nu_{i} }{ \arg\min }\lVert Q(\cdot\mid x,u)-\nu_{i} \rVert _{TV}Then, we define Pn(⋅∣π,u)=∫Xνn(⋅∣x,u) T(dx∣π,u).P_{n}(\cdot\mid \pi,u)=\int\limits _{\mathbb{X}}\nu_{n}(\cdot\mid x,u) \, \mathcal{T}(dx\mid \pi,u). One can prove that ∥P(⋅∣π,u)−Pn(⋅∣π,u)∥TV<1n.\lVert P(\cdot\mid \pi,u)-P_{n}(\cdot\mid \pi,u) \rVert_{TV}< \frac{1}{n}. Moreover, since Pn(⋅∣π,u)P_{n}(\cdot\mid \pi,u) is a mixture of finite Probability Measures {ν1,…,νl}\{ \nu_{1},\dots,\nu_{l} \}, we have that νn(⋅∣x,u)≪Pn(⋅∣π,u)\nu_{n}(\cdot\mid x,u)\ll P_{n}(\cdot\mid \pi,u), ∀x∈Cn\forall x \in C_{n}, where T(Cn∣π,u)=1\mathcal{T}(C_{n}\mid \pi,u)=1. Let C=⋂nCnC=\bigcap_{n}C_{n}, and so, T(C∣π,u)=1\mathcal{T}(C\mid \pi,u)=1. >[!clm] >x∈C  ⟹  Q(dy∣x,u)≪P(dy∣π,u)x \in C\implies Q(dy\mid x,u)\ll P(dy\mid \pi,u)

To prove this claim we fix any ϵ>0\epsilon>0 and choose n≥1n\ge 1 s.t. ϵ>23n\epsilon> \frac{2}{3n}. Then, ∃δ>0\exists\delta>0 s.t. νn(A∣x,u)<ϵ2\nu_{n}(A\mid x,u)< \frac{\epsilon}{2} whenever Pn(A∣π,u)<δP_{n}(A\mid \pi,u)<\delta. This gives us that Q(A∣x,u)<ϵQ(A\mid x,u)<\epsilon whenever P(A∣π,u)<δ+1nP(A\mid \pi,u)<\delta+ \frac{1}{n}. Hence Q(dy∣x,u)≪P(dy∣π,u)Q(dy\mid x,u)\ll P(dy\mid \pi,u). \end{proof}

Linked from