Paper detail

Efficient Exploration via First-Person Behavior Cloning Assisted Rapidly-Exploring Random Trees

Modern day computer games have extremely large state and action spaces. To detect bugs in these games' models, human testers play the games repeatedly to explore the game and find errors in the games. Such gameplay is exhaustive and time consuming. Moreover, since robotics simulators depend on similar methods of model specification and debugging, the problem of finding errors in the model is of interest to the robotics community to ensure robot behaviors and interactions are consistent in simulators. Previous methods have used reinforcement learning arXiv:2103.13798 and search based methods (Chang, 2019, (Chang, 2021) arXiv:1811.06962 including Rapidly-exploring Random Trees (RRT) to explore a game's state-action space to find bugs. However, such search and exploration based methods are not efficient at exploring the state-action space without a pre-defined heuristic. In this work we attempt to combine a human-tester's expertise in solving games, and the RRT's exhaustiveness to search a game's state space efficiently with high coverage. This paper introduces Cloning Assisted RRT (CA-RRT) to test a game through search. We compare our methods to two existing baselines: 1) a weighted-RRT as described by arXiv:1812.03125; 2) human demonstration seeded RRT as described by Chang et. al. We find CA-RRT is applicable to more game maps and explores more game states in fewer tree expansions/iterations when compared to the existing baselines. In each test, CA-RRT reached more states on average in the same number of iterations as weighted-RRT. In our tested environments, CA-RRT reached the same number of states as weighted-RRT by more than 5000 fewer iterations on average, almost a 50% reduction and applied to more scenarios than. Moreover, as a consequence of our first person behavior cloning approach, CA-RRT worked on unseen game maps than just seeding the RRT with human demonstrated states.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.