pith. sign in

arxiv: 2104.13906 · v2 · pith:YDXSNRLAnew · submitted 2021-04-28 · 💻 cs.LG

Reward (Mis)design for Autonomous Driving

classification 💻 cs.LG
keywords rewarddesignfunctionsautonomouscheckscommondrivingerrors
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

This article considers the problem of diagnosing certain common errors in reward design. Its insights are also applicable to the design of cost functions and performance metrics more generally. To diagnose common errors, we develop 8 simple sanity checks for identifying flaws in reward functions. These sanity checks are applied to reward functions from past work on reinforcement learning (RL) for autonomous driving (AD), revealing near-universal flaws in reward design for AD that might also exist pervasively across reward design for other tasks. Lastly, we explore promising directions that may aid the design of reward functions for AD in subsequent research, following a process of inquiry that can be adapted to other domains.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. The Effects of Reward Misspecification: Mapping and Mitigating Misaligned Models

    cs.LG 2022-01 conditional novelty 6.0

    More capable RL agents exploit reward misspecifications more often, with phase transitions in behavior, and anomaly detectors can identify misaligned policies.