It is crucial for robots to be aware of the presence of constraints in order to acquire safe policies. However, explicitly specifying all constraints in an environment can be a challenging task. State-of-the-art constraint inference algorithms learn constraints from demonstrations, but tend to be computationally expensive and prone to instability issues. In this paper, we propose a novel Bayesian method that infers constraints based on preferences over demonstrations. The main advantages of our proposed approach are that it 1) infers constraints without calculating a new policy at each iteration, 2) uses a simple and more realistic ranking of groups of demonstrations, without requiring pairwise comparisons over all demonstrations, and 3) adapts to cases where there are varying levels of constraint violation. Our empirical results demonstrate that our proposed Bayesian approach infers constraints of varying severity, more accurately than state-of-the-art constraint inference methods.
We study the problem of determining the emergent behaviors that are possible given a functionally heterogeneous swarm of robots with limited capabilities. Prior work has considered behavior search for homogeneous swarms and proposed the use of novelty search over either a hand-specified or learned behavior space followed by clustering to return a taxonomy of emergent behaviors to the user. In this paper, we seek to better understand the role of novelty search and the efficacy of using clustering to discover novel emergent behaviors. Through a large set of experiments and ablations, we analyze the effect of representations, evolutionary search, and various clustering methods in the search for novel behaviors in a heterogeneous swarm. Our results indicate that prior methods fail to discover many interesting behaviors and that an iterative human-in-the-loop discovery process discovers more behaviors than random search, swarm chemistry, and automated behavior discovery. The combined discoveries of our experiments uncover 23 emergent behaviors, 18 of which are novel discoveries. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first known emergent behaviors for heterogeneous swarms of computation-free agents. Videos, code, and appendix are available at the project website: https://sites.google.com/view/heterogeneous-bd-methods
Our ultimate goal is to build robust policies for robots that assist people. What makes this hard is that people can behave unexpectedly at test time, potentially interacting with the robot outside its training distribution and leading to failures. Even just measuring robustness is a challenge. Adversarial perturbations are the default, but they can paint the wrong picture: they can correspond to human motions that are unlikely to occur during natural interactions with people. A robot policy might fail under small adversarial perturbations but work under large natural perturbations. We propose that capturing robustness in these interactive settings requires constructing and analyzing the entire natural-adversarial frontier: the Pareto-frontier of human policies that are the best trade-offs between naturalness and low robot performance. We introduce RIGID, a method for constructing this frontier by training adversarial human policies that trade off between minimizing robot reward and acting human-like (as measured by a discriminator). On an Assistive Gym task, we use RIGID to analyze the performance of standard collaborative Reinforcement Learning, as well as the performance of existing methods meant to increase robustness. We also compare the frontier RIGID identifies with the failures identified in expert adversarial interaction, and with naturally-occurring failures during user interaction. Overall, we find evidence that RIGID can provide a meaningful measure of robustness predictive of deployment performance, and uncover failure cases in human-robot interaction that are difficult to find manually. https://ood-human.github.io.
This paper for the first time attempts to bridge the knowledge between chemistry, fluid mechanics, and robot swarms. By forming these connections, we attempt to leverage established methodologies and tools from these these domains to uncover how we can better comprehend swarms. The focus of this paper is in presenting a new framework and sharing the reasons we find it promising and exciting. While the exact methods are still under development, we believe simply laying out a potential path towards solutions that have evaded our traditional methods using a novel method is worth considering. Our results are characterized through both simulations and real experiments on ground robots.
Deep neural networks often fail catastrophically by relying on spurious correlations. Most prior work assumes a clear dichotomy into spurious and reliable features; however, this is often unrealistic. For example, most of the time we do not want an autonomous car to simply copy the speed of surrounding cars -- we don't want our car to run a red light if a neighboring car does so. However, we cannot simply enforce invariance to next-lane speed, since it could provide valuable information about an unobservable pedestrian at a crosswalk. Thus, universally ignoring features that are sometimes (but not always) reliable can lead to non-robust performance. We formalize a new setting called contextual reliability which accounts for the fact that the "right" features to use may vary depending on the context. We propose and analyze a two-stage framework called Explicit Non-spurious feature Prediction (ENP) which first identifies the relevant features to use for a given context, then trains a model to rely exclusively on these features. Our work theoretically and empirically demonstrates the advantages of ENP over existing methods and provides new benchmarks for contextual reliability.
There is an increasing interest in learning reward functions that model human intent and human preferences. However, many frameworks use blackbox learning methods that, while expressive, are difficult to interpret. We propose and evaluate a novel approach for learning expressive and interpretable reward functions from preferences using Differentiable Decision Trees (DDTs). Our experiments across several domains, including Cartpole, Visual Gridworld environments and Atari games, provide evidence that that the tree structure of our learned reward function is useful in determining the extent to which the reward function is aligned with human preferences. We experimentally demonstrate that using reward DDTs results in competitive performance when compared with larger capacity deep neural network reward functions. We also observe that the choice between soft and hard (argmax) output of reward DDT reveals a tension between wanting highly shaped rewards to ensure good RL performance, while also wanting simple, non-shaped rewards to afford interpretability.
Preference-based reinforcement learning (PbRL) can enable robots to learn to perform tasks based on an individual's preferences without requiring a hand-crafted reward function. However, existing approaches either assume access to a high-fidelity simulator or analytic model or take a model-free approach that requires extensive, possibly unsafe online environment interactions. In this paper, we study the benefits and challenges of using a learned dynamics model when performing PbRL. In particular, we provide evidence that a learned dynamics model offers the following benefits when performing PbRL: (1) preference elicitation and policy optimization require significantly fewer environment interactions than model-free PbRL, (2) diverse preference queries can be synthesized safely and efficiently as a byproduct of standard model-based RL, and (3) reward pre-training based on suboptimal demonstrations can be performed without any environmental interaction. Our paper provides empirical evidence that learned dynamics models enable robots to learn customized policies based on user preferences in ways that are safer and more sample efficient than prior preference learning approaches.
Learning a reward function from human preferences is challenging as it typically requires having a high-fidelity simulator or using expensive and potentially unsafe actual physical rollouts in the environment. However, in many tasks the agent might have access to offline data from related tasks in the same target environment. While offline data is increasingly being used to aid policy optimization via offline RL, our observation is that it can be a surprisingly rich source of information for preference learning as well. We propose an approach that uses an offline dataset to craft preference queries via pool-based active learning, learns a distribution over reward functions, and optimizes a corresponding policy via offline RL. Crucially, our proposed approach does not require actual physical rollouts or an accurate simulator for either the reward learning or policy optimization steps. To test our approach, we first evaluate existing offline RL benchmarks for their suitability for offline reward learning. Surprisingly, for many offline RL domains, we find that simply using a trivial reward function results good policy performance, making these domains ill-suited for evaluating learned rewards. To address this, we identify a subset of existing offline RL benchmarks that are well suited for offline reward learning and also propose new offline apprenticeship learning benchmarks which allow for more open-ended behaviors. When evaluated on this curated set of domains, our empirical results suggest that combining offline RL with learned human preferences can enable an agent to learn to perform novel tasks that were not explicitly shown in the offline data.
When robots learn reward functions using high capacity models that take raw state directly as input, they need to both learn a representation for what matters in the task -- the task ``features" -- as well as how to combine these features into a single objective. If they try to do both at once from input designed to teach the full reward function, it is easy to end up with a representation that contains spurious correlations in the data, which fails to generalize to new settings. Instead, our ultimate goal is to enable robots to identify and isolate the causal features that people actually care about and use when they represent states and behavior. Our idea is that we can tune into this representation by asking users what behaviors they consider similar: behaviors will be similar if the features that matter are similar, even if low-level behavior is different; conversely, behaviors will be different if even one of the features that matter differs. This, in turn, is what enables the robot to disambiguate between what needs to go into the representation versus what is spurious, as well as what aspects of behavior can be compressed together versus not. The notion of learning representations based on similarity has a nice parallel in contrastive learning, a self-supervised representation learning technique that maps visually similar data points to similar embeddings, where similarity is defined by a designer through data augmentation heuristics. By contrast, in order to learn the representations that people use, so we can learn their preferences and objectives, we use their definition of similarity. In simulation as well as in a user study, we show that learning through such similarity queries leads to representations that, while far from perfect, are indeed more generalizable than self-supervised and task-input alternatives.