Value function interference and greedy action selection in value-based multi-objective reinforcement learning

Multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) algorithms extend conventional reinforcement learning (RL) to the more general case of problems with multiple, conflicting objectives, represented by vector-valued rewards. Widely-used scalar RL methods such as Q-learning can be modified to handle multiple objectives by (1) learning vector-valued value functions, and (2) performing action selection using a scalarisation or ordering operator which reflects the user's utility with respect to the different objectives. However, as we demonstrate here, if the user's utility function maps widely varying vector-values to similar levels of utility, this can lead to interference in the value-function learned by the agent, leading to convergence to sub-optimal policies. This will be most prevalent in stochastic environments when optimising for the Expected Scalarised Return criterion, but we present a simple example showing that interference can also arise in deterministic environments. We demonstrate empirically that avoiding the use of random tie-breaking when identifying greedy actions can ameliorate, but not fully overcome, the problems caused by value function interference.

Utility-Based Reinforcement Learning: Unifying Single-objective and Multi-objective Reinforcement Learning

Research in multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) has introduced the utility-based paradigm, which makes use of both environmental rewards and a function that defines the utility derived by the user from those rewards. In this paper we extend this paradigm to the context of single-objective reinforcement learning (RL), and outline multiple potential benefits including the ability to perform multi-policy learning across tasks relating to uncertain objectives, risk-aware RL, discounting, and safe RL. We also examine the algorithmic implications of adopting a utility-based approach.

An Empirical Investigation of Value-Based Multi-objective Reinforcement Learning for Stochastic Environments

One common approach to solve multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) problems is to extend conventional Q-learning by using vector Q-values in combination with a utility function. However issues can arise with this approach in the context of stochastic environments, particularly when optimising for the Scalarised Expected Reward (SER) criterion. This paper extends prior research, providing a detailed examination of the factors influencing the frequency with which value-based MORL Q-learning algorithms learn the SER-optimal policy for an environment with stochastic state transitions. We empirically examine several variations of the core multi-objective Q-learning algorithm as well as reward engineering approaches, and demonstrate the limitations of these methods. In particular, we highlight the critical impact of the noisy Q-value estimates issue on the stability and convergence of these algorithms.

Intent-aligned AI systems deplete human agency: the need for agency foundations research in AI safety

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) systems suggests that artificial general intelligence (AGI) systems may soon arrive. Many researchers are concerned that AIs and AGIs will harm humans via intentional misuse (AI-misuse) or through accidents (AI-accidents). In respect of AI-accidents, there is an increasing effort focused on developing algorithms and paradigms that ensure AI systems are aligned to what humans intend, e.g. AI systems that yield actions or recommendations that humans might judge as consistent with their intentions and goals. Here we argue that alignment to human intent is insufficient for safe AI systems and that preservation of long-term agency of humans may be a more robust standard, and one that needs to be separated explicitly and a priori during optimization. We argue that AI systems can reshape human intention and discuss the lack of biological and psychological mechanisms that protect humans from loss of agency. We provide the first formal definition of agency-preserving AI-human interactions which focuses on forward-looking agency evaluations and argue that AI systems - not humans - must be increasingly tasked with making these evaluations. We show how agency loss can occur in simple environments containing embedded agents that use temporal-difference learning to make action recommendations. Finally, we propose a new area of research called "agency foundations" and pose four initial topics designed to improve our understanding of agency in AI-human interactions: benevolent game theory, algorithmic foundations of human rights, mechanistic interpretability of agency representation in neural-networks and reinforcement learning from internal states.

Broad-persistent Advice for Interactive Reinforcement Learning Scenarios

The use of interactive advice in reinforcement learning scenarios allows for speeding up the learning process for autonomous agents. Current interactive reinforcement learning research has been limited to real-time interactions that offer relevant user advice to the current state only. Moreover, the information provided by each interaction is not retained and instead discarded by the agent after a single use. In this paper, we present a method for retaining and reusing provided knowledge, allowing trainers to give general advice relevant to more than just the current state. Results obtained show that the use of broad-persistent advice substantially improves the performance of the agent while reducing the number of interactions required for the trainer.

Elastic Step DQN: A novel multi-step algorithm to alleviate overestimation in Deep QNetworks

Deep Q-Networks algorithm (DQN) was the first reinforcement learning algorithm using deep neural network to successfully surpass human level performance in a number of Atari learning environments. However, divergent and unstable behaviour have been long standing issues in DQNs. The unstable behaviour is often characterised by overestimation in the $Q$-values, commonly referred to as the overestimation bias. To address the overestimation bias and the divergent behaviour, a number of heuristic extensions have been proposed. Notably, multi-step updates have been shown to drastically reduce unstable behaviour while improving agent's training performance. However, agents are often highly sensitive to the selection of the multi-step update horizon ($n$), and our empirical experiments show that a poorly chosen static value for $n$ can in many cases lead to worse performance than single-step DQN. Inspired by the success of $n$-step DQN and the effects that multi-step updates have on overestimation bias, this paper proposes a new algorithm that we call `Elastic Step DQN' (ES-DQN). It dynamically varies the step size horizon in multi-step updates based on the similarity of states visited. Our empirical evaluation shows that ES-DQN out-performs $n$-step with fixed $n$ updates, Double DQN and Average DQN in several OpenAI Gym environments while at the same time alleviating the overestimation bias.

Evaluating Human-like Explanations for Robot Actions in Reinforcement Learning Scenarios

Explainable artificial intelligence is a research field that tries to provide more transparency for autonomous intelligent systems. Explainability has been used, particularly in reinforcement learning and robotic scenarios, to better understand the robot decision-making process. Previous work, however, has been widely focused on providing technical explanations that can be better understood by AI practitioners than non-expert end-users. In this work, we make use of human-like explanations built from the probability of success to complete the goal that an autonomous robot shows after performing an action. These explanations are intended to be understood by people who have no or very little experience with artificial intelligence methods. This paper presents a user trial to study whether these explanations that focus on the probability an action has of succeeding in its goal constitute a suitable explanation for non-expert end-users. The results obtained show that non-expert participants rate robot explanations that focus on the probability of success higher and with less variance than technical explanations generated from Q-values, and also favor counterfactual explanations over standalone explanations.

Explainable Reinforcement Learning for Broad-XAI: A Conceptual Framework and Survey

Broad Explainable Artificial Intelligence moves away from interpreting individual decisions based on a single datum and aims to provide integrated explanations from multiple machine learning algorithms into a coherent explanation of an agent's behaviour that is aligned to the communication needs of the explainee. Reinforcement Learning (RL) methods, we propose, provide a potential backbone for the cognitive model required for the development of Broad-XAI. RL represents a suite of approaches that have had increasing success in solving a range of sequential decision-making problems. However, these algorithms all operate as black-box problem solvers, where they obfuscate their decision-making policy through a complex array of values and functions. EXplainable RL (XRL) is relatively recent field of research that aims to develop techniques to extract concepts from the agent's: perception of the environment; intrinsic/extrinsic motivations/beliefs; Q-values, goals and objectives. This paper aims to introduce a conceptual framework, called the Causal XRL Framework (CXF), that unifies the current XRL research and uses RL as a backbone to the development of Broad-XAI. Additionally, we recognise that RL methods have the ability to incorporate a range of technologies to allow agents to adapt to their environment. CXF is designed for the incorporation of many standard RL extensions and integrated with external ontologies and communication facilities so that the agent can answer questions that explain outcomes and justify its decisions.

Levels of explainable artificial intelligence for human-aligned conversational explanations

Over the last few years there has been rapid research growth into eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) and the closely aligned Interpretable Machine Learning (IML). Drivers for this growth include recent legislative changes and increased investments by industry and governments, along with increased concern from the general public. People are affected by autonomous decisions every day and the public need to understand the decision-making process to accept the outcomes. However, the vast majority of the applications of XAI/IML are focused on providing low-level `narrow' explanations of how an individual decision was reached based on a particular datum. While important, these explanations rarely provide insights into an agent's: beliefs and motivations; hypotheses of other (human, animal or AI) agents' intentions; interpretation of external cultural expectations; or, processes used to generate its own explanation. Yet all of these factors, we propose, are essential to providing the explanatory depth that people require to accept and trust the AI's decision-making. This paper aims to define levels of explanation and describe how they can be integrated to create a human-aligned conversational explanation system. In so doing, this paper will survey current approaches and discuss the integration of different technologies to achieve these levels with Broad eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (Broad-XAI), and thereby move towards high-level `strong' explanations.

A Practical Guide to Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning and Planning

Real-world decision-making tasks are generally complex, requiring trade-offs between multiple, often conflicting, objectives. Despite this, the majority of research in reinforcement learning and decision-theoretic planning either assumes only a single objective, or that multiple objectives can be adequately handled via a simple linear combination. Such approaches may oversimplify the underlying problem and hence produce suboptimal results. This paper serves as a guide to the application of multi-objective methods to difficult problems, and is aimed at researchers who are already familiar with single-objective reinforcement learning and planning methods who wish to adopt a multi-objective perspective on their research, as well as practitioners who encounter multi-objective decision problems in practice. It identifies the factors that may influence the nature of the desired solution, and illustrates by example how these influence the design of multi-objective decision-making systems for complex problems.