Uncertain Decisions Facilitate Better Preference Learning
Cassidy Laidlaw, Stuart Russell
Abstract
Existing observational approaches for learning human preferences, such as inverse reinforcement learning, usually make strong assumptions about the observability of the human's environment. However, in reality, people make many important decisions under uncertainty. To better understand preference learning in these cases, we study the setting of inverse decision theory (IDT), a previously proposed framework where a human is observed making non-sequential binary decisions under uncertainty. In IDT, the human's preferences are conveyed through their loss function, which expresses a tradeoff between different types of mistakes. We give the first statistical analysis of IDT, providing conditions necessary to identify these preferences and characterizing the sample complexity -- the number of decisions that must be observed to learn the tradeoff the human is making to a desired precision. Interestingly, we show that it is actually easier to identify preferences when the decision problem is more uncertain. Furthermore, uncertain decision problems allow us to relax the unrealistic assumption that the human is an optimal decision maker but still identify their exact preferences; we give sample complexities in this suboptimal case as well. Our analysis contradicts the intuition that partial observability should make preference learning more difficult. It also provides a first step towards understanding and improving preference learning methods for uncertain and suboptimal humans.
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 dc2074b9-4cb8-4d58-845a-6d1d9a458220Cited by top-tier papers3
- Personalizing Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with Variational Preference LearningSriyash Poddar, Yanming Wan, Hamish Ivison, Abhishek Gupta et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 188 citations
- Learning Personalized Decision Support PoliciesUmang Bhatt, Valerie Chen, Katherine M. Collins, Parameswaran Kamalaruban et al.AAAI 2025 · 14 citations
- ID-GMLM: Intelligent Decision-Making with Integrated Graph Models and Large Language ModelsZhenhua Meng, Fanshen Meng, Rongheng Lin, Budan WuAAAI 2025
Builds on3
- Reward-rational (implicit) choice: A unifying formalism for reward learningHong Jun Jeon, Smitha Milli, Anca D. DraganNeurIPS 2020 · 219 citations
- Quantifying Differences in Reward FunctionsAdam Gleave, Michael Dennis, Shane Legg, Stuart Russell et al.ICLR 2021 · 77 citations
- Fair Performance Metric ElicitationGaurush Hiranandani, Harikrishna Narasimhan, Oluwasanmi KoyejoNeurIPS 2020 · 20 citations
Related papers
- Inverse Decision Modeling: Learning Interpretable Representations of BehaviorDaniel Jarrett, Alihan Hüyük, Mihaela van der SchaarICML 2021 · 30 citations
- Bounded Risk-Sensitive Markov Games: Forward Policy Design and Inverse Reward Learning with Iterative Reasoning and Cumulative Prospect TheoryRan Tian, Liting Sun, Masayoshi TomizukaAAAI 2021 · 13 citations
- Inverse Active Sensing: Modeling and Understanding Timely Decision-MakingDaniel Jarrett, Mihaela van der SchaarICML 2020 · 20 citations
- Quantifying the Sensitivity of Inverse Reinforcement Learning to MisspecificationJoar Max Viktor Skalse, Alessandro AbateICLR 2024 · 5 citations
- Learning Utilities from Demonstrations in Markov Decision ProcessesFilippo Lazzati, Alberto Maria MetelliICML 2025
