BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Peter Vamplew

Peter Vamplew appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Artificial IntelligenceMachine LearningHuman-Computer InteractionMultiagent Systems

Catalog footprint

What is connected

8works
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2024arXiv

An Empirical Investigation of Value-Based Multi-objective Reinforcement Learning for Stochastic Environments

One common approach to solve multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) problems is to extend conventional Q-learning by using vector Q-values in combination with a utility function. However issues can arise with this approach in the context of stochastic environments, particularly when optimising for the Scalarised Expected Reward (SER) criterion. This paper extends prior research, providing a detailed examination of the factors influencing the frequency with which value-based MORL Q-learning algorithms learn the SER-optimal policy for an environment with stochastic state transitions. We empirically examine several variations of the core multi-objective Q-learning algorithm as well as reward engineering approaches, and demonstrate the limitations of these methods. In particular, we highlight the critical impact of the noisy Q-value estimates issue on the stability and convergence of these algorithms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Evaluating Human-like Explanations for Robot Actions in Reinforcement Learning Scenarios

Explainable artificial intelligence is a research field that tries to provide more transparency for autonomous intelligent systems. Explainability has been used, particularly in reinforcement learning and robotic scenarios, to better understand the robot decision-making process. Previous work, however, has been widely focused on providing technical explanations that can be better understood by AI practitioners than non-expert end-users. In this work, we make use of human-like explanations built from the probability of success to complete the goal that an autonomous robot shows after performing an action. These explanations are intended to be understood by people who have no or very little experience with artificial intelligence methods. This paper presents a user trial to study whether these explanations that focus on the probability an action has of succeeding in its goal constitute a suitable explanation for non-expert end-users. The results obtained show that non-expert participants rate robot explanations that focus on the probability of success higher and with less variance than technical explanations generated from Q-values, and also favor counterfactual explanations over standalone explanations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Human Engagement Providing Evaluative and Informative Advice for Interactive Reinforcement Learning

Interactive reinforcement learning proposes the use of externally-sourced information in order to speed up the learning process. When interacting with a learner agent, humans may provide either evaluative or informative advice. Prior research has focused on the effect of human-sourced advice by including real-time feedback on the interactive reinforcement learning process, specifically aiming to improve the learning speed of the agent, while minimising the time demands on the human. This work focuses on answering which of two approaches, evaluative or informative, is the preferred instructional approach for humans. Moreover, this work presents an experimental setup for a human-trial designed to compare the methods people use to deliver advice in terms of human engagement. The results obtained show that users giving informative advice to the learner agents provide more accurate advice, are willing to assist the learner agent for a longer time, and provide more advice per episode. Additionally, self-evaluation from participants using the informative approach has indicated that the agent's ability to follow the advice is higher, and therefore, they feel their own advice to be of higher accuracy when compared to people providing evaluative advice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

A Practical Guide to Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning and Planning

Real-world decision-making tasks are generally complex, requiring trade-offs between multiple, often conflicting, objectives. Despite this, the majority of research in reinforcement learning and decision-theoretic planning either assumes only a single objective, or that multiple objectives can be adequately handled via a simple linear combination. Such approaches may oversimplify the underlying problem and hence produce suboptimal results. This paper serves as a guide to the application of multi-objective methods to difficult problems, and is aimed at researchers who are already familiar with single-objective reinforcement learning and planning methods who wish to adopt a multi-objective perspective on their research, as well as practitioners who encounter multi-objective decision problems in practice. It identifies the factors that may influence the nature of the desired solution, and illustrates by example how these influence the design of multi-objective decision-making systems for complex problems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Scalar reward is not enough: A response to Silver, Singh, Precup and Sutton (2021)

The recent paper `"Reward is Enough" by Silver, Singh, Precup and Sutton posits that the concept of reward maximisation is sufficient to underpin all intelligence, both natural and artificial. We contest the underlying assumption of Silver et al. that such reward can be scalar-valued. In this paper we explain why scalar rewards are insufficient to account for some aspects of both biological and computational intelligence, and argue in favour of explicitly multi-objective models of reward maximisation. Furthermore, we contend that even if scalar reward functions can trigger intelligent behaviour in specific cases, it is still undesirable to use this approach for the development of artificial general intelligence due to unacceptable risks of unsafe or unethical behaviour.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

A Multi-Objective Deep Reinforcement Learning Framework

This paper introduces a new scalable multi-objective deep reinforcement learning (MODRL) framework based on deep Q-networks. We develop a high-performance MODRL framework that supports both single-policy and multi-policy strategies, as well as both linear and non-linear approaches to action selection. The experimental results on two benchmark problems (two-objective deep sea treasure environment and three-objective Mountain Car problem) indicate that the proposed framework is able to find the Pareto-optimal solutions effectively. The proposed framework is generic and highly modularized, which allows the integration of different deep reinforcement learning algorithms in different complex problem domains. This therefore overcomes many disadvantages involved with standard multi-objective reinforcement learning methods in the current literature. The proposed framework acts as a testbed platform that accelerates the development of MODRL for solving increasingly complicated multi-objective problems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Discrete-to-Deep Supervised Policy Learning

Neural networks are effective function approximators, but hard to train in the reinforcement learning (RL) context mainly because samples are correlated. For years, scholars have got around this by employing experience replay or an asynchronous parallel-agent system. This paper proposes Discrete-to-Deep Supervised Policy Learning (D2D-SPL) for training neural networks in RL. D2D-SPL discretises the continuous state space into discrete states and uses actor-critic to learn a policy. It then selects from each discrete state an input value and the action with the highest numerical preference as an input/target pair. Finally it uses input/target pairs from all discrete states to train a classifier. D2D-SPL uses a single agent, needs no experience replay and learns much faster than state-of-the-art methods. We test our method with two RL environments, the Cartpole and an aircraft manoeuvring simulator.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

A Survey of Multi-Objective Sequential Decision-Making

Sequential decision-making problems with multiple objectives arise naturally in practice and pose unique challenges for research in decision-theoretic planning and learning, which has largely focused on single-objective settings. This article surveys algorithms designed for sequential decision-making problems with multiple objectives. Though there is a growing body of literature on this subject, little of it makes explicit under what circumstances special methods are needed to solve multi-objective problems. Therefore, we identify three distinct scenarios in which converting such a problem to a single-objective one is impossible, infeasible, or undesirable. Furthermore, we propose a taxonomy that classifies multi-objective methods according to the applicable scenario, the nature of the scalarization function (which projects multi-objective values to scalar ones), and the type of policies considered. We show how these factors determine the nature of an optimal solution, which can be a single policy, a convex hull, or a Pareto front. Using this taxonomy, we survey the literature on multi-objective methods for planning and learning. Finally, we discuss key applications of such methods and outline opportunities for future work.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access