Complex Model Transformations by Reinforcement Learning with Uncertain Human Guidance

Model-driven engineering problems often require complex model transformations (MTs), i.e., MTs that are chained in extensive sequences. Pertinent examples of such problems include model synchronization, automated model repair, and design space exploration. Manually developing complex MTs is an error-prone and often infeasible process. Reinforcement learning (RL) is an apt way to alleviate these issues. In RL, an autonomous agent explores the state space through trial and error to identify beneficial sequences of actions, such as MTs. However, RL methods exhibit performance issues in complex problems. In these situations, human guidance can be of high utility. In this paper, we present an approach and technical framework for developing complex MT sequences through RL, guided by potentially uncertain human advice. Our framework allows user-defined MTs to be mapped onto RL primitives, and executes them as RL programs to find optimal MT sequences. Our evaluation shows that human guidance, even if uncertain, substantially improves RL performance, and results in more efficient development of complex MTs. Through a trade-off between the certainty and timeliness of human advice, our method takes a step towards RL-driven human-in-the-loop engineering methods.

Opinion-Guided Reinforcement Learning

Human guidance is often desired in reinforcement learning to improve the performance of the learning agent. However, human insights are often mere opinions and educated guesses rather than well-formulated arguments. While opinions are subject to uncertainty, e.g., due to partial informedness or ignorance about a problem, they also emerge earlier than hard evidence could be produced. Thus, guiding reinforcement learning agents through opinions offers the potential for more performant learning processes, but comes with the challenge of modeling and managing opinions in a formal way. In this article, we present a method to guide reinforcement learning agents through opinions. To this end, we provide an end-to-end method to model and manage advisors' opinions. To assess the utility of the approach, we evaluate it with synthetic and human advisors, at different levels of uncertainty, and under multiple advise strategies. Our results indicate that opinions, even if uncertain, improve the performance of reinforcement learning agents, resulting in higher rewards, more efficient exploration, and a better reinforced policy. Although we demonstrate our approach in a simplified topological running example, our approach is applicable to complex problems with higher dimensions as well.