Predicting Future Actions of Reinforcement Learning Agents
Stephen Chung, Scott Niekum, David Krueger
Abstract
As reinforcement learning agents become increasingly deployed in real-world scenarios, predicting future agent actions and events during deployment is important for facilitating better human-agent interaction and preventing catastrophic outcomes. This paper experimentally evaluates and compares the effectiveness of future action and event prediction for three types of RL agents: explicitly planning, implicitly planning, and non-planning. We employ two approaches: the inner state approach, which involves predicting based on the inner computations of the agents (e.g., plans or neuron activations), and a simulation-based approach, which involves unrolling the agent in a learned world model. Our results show that the plans of explicitly planning agents are significantly more informative for prediction than the neuron activations of the other types. Furthermore, using internal plans proves more robust to model quality compared to simulation-based approaches when predicting actions, while the results for event prediction are more mixed. These findings highlight the benefits of leveraging inner states and simulations to predict future agent actions and events, thereby improving interaction and safety in real-world deployments.
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 de89c3e0-eaae-4e91-bd55-d23a16db4337Cited by top-tier papers3
- Deep RL Needs Deep Behavior Analysis: Exploring Implicit Planning by Model-Free Agents in Open-Ended EnvironmentsRiley Simmons-Edler, Ryan Paul Badman, Felix Baastad Berg, Raymond Chua et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
- Path Channels and Plan Extension Kernels: a Mechanistic Description of Planning in a Sokoban RNNMohammad Taufeeque, Aaron David Tucker, Adam Gleave, Adrià Garriga-AlonsoICLR 2026 · 5 citations
- Interpreting Emergent Planning in Model-Free Reinforcement LearningThomas Bush, Stephen Chung, Usman Anwar, Adrià Garriga-Alonso et al.ICLR 2025
Builds on4
- Dream to Control: Learning Behaviors by Latent ImaginationDanijar Hafner, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Jimmy Ba, Mohammad NorouziICLR 2020 · 1,852 citations
- Goal Misgeneralization in Deep Reinforcement LearningLauro Langosco di Langosco, Jack Koch, Lee D. Sharkey, Jacob Pfau et al.ICML 2022 · 128 citations
- Safe Reinforcement Learning by Imagining the Near FutureGarrett Thomas, Yuping Luo, Tengyu MaNeurIPS 2021 · 118 citations
- Thinker: Learning to Plan and ActStephen Chung, Ivan Anokhin, David KruegerNeurIPS 2023 · 18 citations
Related papers
- Forethought and Hindsight in Credit AssignmentVeronica Chelu, Doina Precup, Hado van HasseltNeurIPS 2020 · 29 citations
- Current Agents Fail to Leverage World Model as Tool for ForesightCheng Qian, Emre Can Acikgoz, Bingxuan Li, Xiusi Chen et al.ACL 2026 · 10 citations
- R-WoM: Retrieval-augmented World Model For Computer-use AgentsKai Mei, Jiang Guo, Shuaichen Chang, Mingwen Dong et al.ICLR 2026 · 12 citations
- Autoregressive Dynamics Models for Offline Policy Evaluation and OptimizationMichael R. Zhang, Thomas Paine, Ofir Nachum, Cosmin Paduraru et al.ICLR 2021 · 52 citations
- Robust Neuro-Symbolic Goal and Plan RecognitionLeonardo Amado, Ramon Fraga Pereira, Felipe MeneguzziAAAI 2023 · 14 citations
