Towards the Transferability of Rewards Recovered via Regularized Inverse Reinforcement Learning
Andreas Schlaginhaufen, Maryam Kamgarpour
Abstract
Inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) aims to infer a reward from expert demonstrations, motivated by the idea that the reward, rather than the policy, is the most succinct and transferable description of a task [Ng et al., 2000]. However, the reward corresponding to an optimal policy is not unique, making it unclear if an IRL-learned reward is transferable to new transition laws in the sense that its optimal policy aligns with the optimal policy corresponding to the expert's true reward. Past work has addressed this problem only under the assumption of full access to the expert's policy, guaranteeing transferability when learning from two experts with the same reward but different transition laws that satisfy a specific rank condition [Rolland et al., 2022]. In this work, we show that the conditions developed under full access to the expert's policy cannot guarantee transferability in the more practical scenario where we have access only to demonstrations of the expert. Instead of a binary rank condition, we propose principal angles as a more refined measure of similarity and dissimilarity between transition laws. Based on this, we then establish two key results: 1) a sufficient condition for transferability to any transition laws when learning from at least two experts with sufficiently different transition laws, and 2) a sufficient condition for transferability to local changes in the transition law when learning from a single expert. Furthermore, we also provide a probably approximately correct (PAC) algorithm and an end-to-end analysis for learning transferable rewards from demonstrations of multiple experts.
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.
Cited by top-tier papers4
- Efficient Preference-Based Reinforcement Learning: Randomized Exploration meets Experimental DesignAndreas Schlaginhaufen, Reda Ouhamma, Maryam KamgarpourNeurIPS 2025 · 4 citations
- Learning Utilities from Demonstrations in Markov Decision ProcessesFilippo Lazzati, Alberto Maria MetelliICML 2025
- Understanding Constraint Inference in Safety-Critical Inverse Reinforcement LearningBo Yue, Shufan Wang, Ashish Gaurav, Jian Li et al.ICLR 2025
- Robustness in the Face of Partial Identifiability in Reward LearningFilippo Lazzati, Alberto Maria MetelliICLR 2026
Builds on12
- On the Global Convergence Rates of Softmax Policy Gradient MethodsJincheng Mei, Chenjun Xiao, Csaba Szepesvári, Dale SchuurmansICML 2020 · 349 citations
- The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning PerspectiveRichard Ngo, Lawrence Chan, Sören MindermannICLR 2024 · 296 citations
- IQ-Learn: Inverse soft-Q Learning for ImitationDivyansh Garg, Shuvam Chakraborty, Chris Cundy, Jiaming Song et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 271 citations
- Learning to summarize with human feedbackNisan Stiennon, Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Daniel M. Ziegler et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 124 citations
- Identifiability in inverse reinforcement learningHaoyang Cao, Samuel N. Cohen, Lukasz SzpruchNeurIPS 2021 · 72 citations
Related papers
- Identifiability and generalizability from multiple experts in Inverse Reinforcement LearningPaul Rolland, Luca Viano, Norman Schürhoff, Boris Nikolov et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22 citations
- Is Inverse Reinforcement Learning Harder than Standard Reinforcement Learning? A Theoretical PerspectiveLei Zhao, Mengdi Wang, Yu BaiICML 2024 · 3 citations
- Provably Efficient Learning of Transferable RewardsAlberto Maria Metelli, Giorgia Ramponi, Alessandro Concetti, Marcello RestelliICML 2021 · 36 citations
- Non-Adversarial Inverse Reinforcement Learning via Successor Feature MatchingArnav Kumar Jain, Harley Wiltzer, Jesse Farebrother, Irina Rish et al.ICLR 2025
- Inverse Reinforcement Learning in a Continuous State Space with Formal GuaranteesGregory Dexter, Kevin Bello, Jean HonorioNeurIPS 2021 · 9 citations
