Actually, I didn’t find a reason yet why shouldn’t we use them. Computationally cheap, can improve but do not do damage; In the worst case scenario using them will achieve the same results as not using. It just an extra, very relevant information that you can use or not. Make your choice… 🙂
But if you find a reason why not to use them, please let me know, contact me or leave a comment. Thanks!
Here are two examples where value-driven landmarks can lead us to better decisions in a complex (everyday life), oversubscription planning problems with sequential actions.
Bill achieved his goals! Well, it is a matter of perspective… Value Driven Landmarks for Oversubscription Planning show us a wider picture. Process-Oriented flexible planning for online, landmark-based sequential acting planning and decision making with negative utility interactions between variables (which widely appear also in the non-negative scenarios). Synergistic Criteria for a process of improvement defines a window of opportunity to terminate the process with a profit. Sometimes we better do nothing.
The context of negative effects and interactions with targets can be captured with the net utility of actions definition within Value Driven Landmarks for Oversubscription Planning. A sequence of actions that improve utility terminates with a positive net utility value action. The net and gross utility value of action definitions take into account a wider context of achievements, by capturing inter-state dependencies and intra-state dependencies.