Researcher profile

Michael L. Littman

Michael L. Littman contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Designing Rewards for Fast Learning

To convey desired behavior to a Reinforcement Learning (RL) agent, a designer must choose a reward function for the environment, arguably the most important knob designers have in interacting with RL agents. Although many reward functions induce the same optimal behavior (Ng et al., 1999), in practice, some of them result in faster learning than others. In this paper, we look at how reward-design choices impact learning speed and seek to identify principles of good reward design that quickly induce target behavior. This reward-identification problem is framed as an optimization problem: Firstly, we advocate choosing state-based rewards that maximize the action gap, making optimal actions easy to distinguish from suboptimal ones. Secondly, we propose minimizing a measure of the horizon, something we call the "subjective discount", over which rewards need to be optimized to encourage agents to make optimal decisions with less lookahead. To solve this optimization problem, we propose a linear-programming based algorithm that efficiently finds a reward function that maximizes action gap and minimizes subjective discount. We test the rewards generated with the algorithm in tabular environments with Q-Learning, and empirically show they lead to faster learning. Although we only focus on Q-Learning because it is perhaps the simplest and most well understood RL algorithm, preliminary results with R-max (Brafman and Tennenholtz, 2000) suggest our results are much more general. Our experiments support three principles of reward design: 1) consistent with existing results, penalizing each step taken induces faster learning than rewarding the goal. 2) When rewarding subgoals along the target trajectory, rewards should gradually increase as the goal gets closer. 3) Dense reward that's nonzero on every state is only good if designed carefully.

preprint2022arXiv

On the Expressivity of Markov Reward

Reward is the driving force for reinforcement-learning agents. This paper is dedicated to understanding the expressivity of reward as a way to capture tasks that we would want an agent to perform. We frame this study around three new abstract notions of "task" that might be desirable: (1) a set of acceptable behaviors, (2) a partial ordering over behaviors, or (3) a partial ordering over trajectories. Our main results prove that while reward can express many of these tasks, there exist instances of each task type that no Markov reward function can capture. We then provide a set of polynomial-time algorithms that construct a Markov reward function that allows an agent to optimize tasks of each of these three types, and correctly determine when no such reward function exists. We conclude with an empirical study that corroborates and illustrates our theoretical findings.

preprint2020arXiv

Learning State Abstractions for Transfer in Continuous Control

Can simple algorithms with a good representation solve challenging reinforcement learning problems? In this work, we answer this question in the affirmative, where we take "simple learning algorithm" to be tabular Q-Learning, the "good representations" to be a learned state abstraction, and "challenging problems" to be continuous control tasks. Our main contribution is a learning algorithm that abstracts a continuous state-space into a discrete one. We transfer this learned representation to unseen problems to enable effective learning. We provide theory showing that learned abstractions maintain a bounded value loss, and we report experiments showing that the abstractions empower tabular Q-Learning to learn efficiently in unseen tasks.

preprint2020arXiv

Mitigating Planner Overfitting in Model-Based Reinforcement Learning

An agent with an inaccurate model of its environment faces a difficult choice: it can ignore the errors in its model and act in the real world in whatever way it determines is optimal with respect to its model. Alternatively, it can take a more conservative stance and eschew its model in favor of optimizing its behavior solely via real-world interaction. This latter approach can be exceedingly slow to learn from experience, while the former can lead to "planner overfitting" - aspects of the agent's behavior are optimized to exploit errors in its model. This paper explores an intermediate position in which the planner seeks to avoid overfitting through a kind of regularization of the plans it considers. We present three different approaches that demonstrably mitigate planner overfitting in reinforcement-learning environments.

preprint2020arXiv

The Efficiency of Human Cognition Reflects Planned Information Processing

Planning is useful. It lets people take actions that have desirable long-term consequences. But, planning is hard. It requires thinking about consequences, which consumes limited computational and cognitive resources. Thus, people should plan their actions, but they should also be smart about how they deploy resources used for planning their actions. Put another way, people should also "plan their plans". Here, we formulate this aspect of planning as a meta-reasoning problem and formalize it in terms of a recursive Bellman objective that incorporates both task rewards and information-theoretic planning costs. Our account makes quantitative predictions about how people should plan and meta-plan as a function of the overall structure of a task, which we test in two experiments with human participants. We find that people's reaction times reflect a planned use of information processing, consistent with our account. This formulation of planning to plan provides new insight into the function of hierarchical planning, state abstraction, and cognitive control in both humans and machines.