Reward (Mis)design for Autonomous Driving
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.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
The Effects of Reward Misspecification: Mapping and Mitigating Misaligned Models
More capable RL agents exploit reward misspecifications more often, with phase transitions in behavior, and anomaly detectors can identify misaligned policies.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.