Explicable Policy Search
Ze Gong, Yu Zhang
Abstract
Human teammates often form conscious and subconscious expectations of each other during interaction. Teaming success is contingent on whether such expectations can be met. Similarly, for an intelligent agent to operate beside a human, it must consider the human’s expectation of its behavior. Disregarding such expectations can lead to the loss of trust and degraded team performance. A key challenge here is that the human’s expectation may not align with the agent’s optimal behavior, e.g., due to the human’s partial or inaccurate understanding of the task domain. Prior work on explicable planning described the ability of agents to respect their human teammate’s expectations by trading off task performance for more expected or “ explicable ” behaviors. In this paper, we introduce Explicable Policy Search (EPS) to significantly extend such an ability to stochastic domains in a reinforcement learning (RL) setting with continuous state and action spaces. Furthermore, in contrast to the traditional RL methods, EPS must at the same time infer the human’s hidden expectations. Such inferences require information about the human’s belief about the domain dynamics and her reward model but directly querying them is impractical. We demonstrate that such information can be necessarily and sufficiently encoded by a surrogate reward function for EPS, which can be learned based on the human’s feedback on the agent’s behavior. The surrogate reward function is then used to reshape the agent’s reward function, which is shown to be equivalent to searching for an explicable policy. We evaluate EPS in a set of navigation domains with synthetic human models and in an autonomous driving domain with a user study. The results suggest that our method can generate explicable behaviors that reconcile task performance with human expectations intelligently and has real-world relevance in human-agent teaming domains.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 94e7653d-35d7-42f4-adbd-6a8ca1e4b34aBuilds on5
- Responsive Safety in Reinforcement Learning by PID Lagrangian MethodsAdam Stooke, Joshua Achiam, Pieter AbbeelICML 2020 · 403 citations
- Projection-Based Constrained Policy OptimizationTsung-Yen Yang, Justinian Rosca, Karthik Narasimhan, Peter J. RamadgeICLR 2020 · 306 citations
- Safe Reinforcement Learning in Constrained Markov Decision ProcessesAkifumi Wachi, Yanan SuiICML 2020 · 190 citations
- Constrained Policy Optimization via Bayesian World ModelsYarden As, Ilnura Usmanova, Sebastian Curi, Andreas KrauseICLR 2022 · 73 citations
- What Is It You Really Want of Me? Generalized Reward Learning with Biased Beliefs about Domain DynamicsZe Gong, Yu ZhangAAAI 2020 · 14 citations
Related papers
- Learning Human Objectives by Evaluating Hypothetical BehaviorSiddharth Reddy, Anca D. Dragan, Sergey Levine, Shane Legg et al.ICML 2020 · 81 citations
- Hierarchical Expertise-Level Modeling for User Specific Robot-Behavior ExplanationsSarath Sreedharan, Tathagata Chakraborti, Christian Muise, Subbarao KambhampatiAAAI 2020 · 19 citations
- Expectation Alignment: Handling Reward Misspecification in the Presence of Expectation MismatchMalek Mechergui, Sarath SreedharanNeurIPS 2024 · 4 citations
- Explainable Reinforcement Learning via Model TransformsMira Finkelstein, Nitsan Levy Schlot, Lucy Liu, Yoav Kolumbus et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 18 citations
- EPO: Explicit Policy Optimization for Strategic Reasoning in LLMs via Reinforcement LearningXiaoqian Liu, Ke Wang, Yongbin Li, Yuchuan Wu et al.ACL 2025 · 7 citations
