what's the weirdest thing you've stumbled upon in #RL #reinforcementlearning ?
i'll start:
if using neural nets* you don't actually need any rewards to train an agent optimally on episodic cartpole.
* or positive initializations
what's the weirdest thing you've stumbled upon in #RL #reinforcementlearning ?
i'll start:
if using neural nets* you don't actually need any rewards to train an agent optimally on episodic cartpole.
* or positive initializations
We consider a setting for Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) where the learner is extended with the ability to actively select multiple environments, observing an agent's behavior on each environment. We first demonstrate that if the learner can experiment with any transition dynamics on some fixed set of states and actions, then there exists an algorithm that reconstructs the agent's reward function to the fullest extent theoretically possible, and that requires only a small (logarithmic) number of experiments. We contrast this result to what is known about IRL in single fixed environments, namely that the true reward function is fundamentally unidentifiable. We then extend this setting to the more realistic case where the learner may not select any transition dynamic, but rather is restricted to some fixed set of environments that it may try. We connect the problem of maximizing the information derived from experiments to submodular function maximization and demonstrate that a greedy algorithm is near optimal (up to logarithmic factors). Finally, we empirically validate our algorithm on an environment inspired by behavioral psychology.
@ashishgaurav_13 so you're partially correct, except for the termination bit. the theory in that paper is for infinite-horizon discounted MDPs (which is why they do things like
\[ (I - \gamma P_{\pi})^{-1} \]
).
so their theory doesn't apply to the "applied" setting of implemented cartpole, where we artificially terminate episodes.
this has motivated me to write this up this finding more formally... stay tuned!