Inferring Implicit Goals Across Differing Task Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.17704v1
• Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 15:20:43 GMT
• Title: Inferring Implicit Goals Across Differing Task Models
• Authors: Silvia Tulli, Stylianos Loukas Vasileiou, Mohamed Chetouani, Sarath Sreedharan,
• Abstract summary: The existence of implicit requirements could be common in settings where the user's understanding of the task model may differ from the agent's estimate of the model. This paper addresses such expectation mismatch by capturing the possibility of unspecified user subgoal in the context of a task captured as a Markov Decision Process (MDP) and querying for it as required.
• Score: 20.725482497743865
• License:
• Abstract: One of the significant challenges to generating value-aligned behavior is to not only account for the specified user objectives but also any implicit or unspecified user requirements. The existence of such implicit requirements could be particularly common in settings where the user's understanding of the task model may differ from the agent's estimate of the model. Under this scenario, the user may incorrectly expect some agent behavior to be inevitable or guaranteed. This paper addresses such expectation mismatch in the presence of differing models by capturing the possibility of unspecified user subgoal in the context of a task captured as a Markov Decision Process (MDP) and querying for it as required. Our method identifies bottleneck states and uses them as candidates for potential implicit subgoals. We then introduce a querying strategy that will generate the minimal number of queries required to identify a policy guaranteed to achieve the underlying goal. Our empirical evaluations demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in inferring and achieving unstated goals across various tasks.

Related papers

• Non-maximizing policies that fulfill multi-criterion aspirations in expectation [0.7874708385247353]
  In dynamic programming and reinforcement learning, the policy for the sequential decision making of an agent is usually determined by expressing the goal as a scalar reward function. We consider finite acyclic Decision Markov Processes with multiple distinct evaluation metrics, which do not necessarily represent quantities that the user wants to be maximized. Our algorithm guarantees that this task is fulfilled by using simplices to approximate feasibility sets and propagate aspirations forward while ensuring they remain feasible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T11:41:04Z)
• Expectation Alignment: Handling Reward Misspecification in the Presence of Expectation Mismatch [19.03141646688652]
  We use the theory of mind, i.e., the human user's beliefs about the AI agent, as a basis to develop a formal explanatory framework. We propose a new interactive algorithm that uses the specified reward to infer potential user expectations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-12T19:43:37Z)
• Tell Me More! Towards Implicit User Intention Understanding of Language Model Driven Agents [110.25679611755962]
  Current language model-driven agents often lack mechanisms for effective user participation, which is crucial given the vagueness commonly found in user instructions. We introduce Intention-in-Interaction (IN3), a novel benchmark designed to inspect users' implicit intentions through explicit queries. We empirically train Mistral-Interact, a powerful model that proactively assesses task vagueness, inquires user intentions, and refines them into actionable goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T14:36:30Z)
• Code Models are Zero-shot Precondition Reasoners [83.8561159080672]
  We use code representations to reason about action preconditions for sequential decision making tasks. We propose a precondition-aware action sampling strategy that ensures actions predicted by a policy are consistent with preconditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T06:19:27Z)
• Diagnosis, Feedback, Adaptation: A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for Test-Time Policy Adaptation [20.266695694005943]
  Policies often fail due to distribution shift -- changes in the state and reward that occur when a policy is deployed in new environments. Data augmentation can increase robustness by making the model invariant to task-irrelevant changes in the agent's observation. We propose an interactive framework to leverage feedback directly from the user to identify personalized task-irrelevant concepts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-12T17:55:08Z)
• Multi-Target Multiplicity: Flexibility and Fairness in Target Specification under Resource Constraints [76.84999501420938]
  We introduce a conceptual and computational framework for assessing how the choice of target affects individuals' outcomes. We show that the level of multiplicity that stems from target variable choice can be greater than that stemming from nearly-optimal models of a single target.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T18:57:14Z)
• Discrete Factorial Representations as an Abstraction for Goal Conditioned Reinforcement Learning [99.38163119531745]
  We show that applying a discretizing bottleneck can improve performance in goal-conditioned RL setups. We experimentally prove the expected return on out-of-distribution goals, while still allowing for specifying goals with expressive structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-01T03:31:43Z)
• Generative multitask learning mitigates target-causing confounding [61.21582323566118]
  We propose a simple and scalable approach to causal representation learning for multitask learning. The improvement comes from mitigating unobserved confounders that cause the targets, but not the input. Our results on the Attributes of People and Taskonomy datasets reflect the conceptual improvement in robustness to prior probability shift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-08T20:42:14Z)
• Don't miss the Mismatch: Investigating the Objective Function Mismatch for Unsupervised Representation Learning [0.0]
  This work builds upon the widely used linear evaluation protocol to define new general evaluation metrics. We study mismatches in pretext and target tasks and study mismatches in a wide range of experiments. In our experiments, we find that the objective function mismatch reduces performance by 0.1-5.0% for Cifar10, Cifar100 and PCam in many setups, and up to 25-59% in extreme cases for the 3dshapes dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-04T20:21:17Z)
• Automatic Curriculum Learning through Value Disagreement [95.19299356298876]
  Continually solving new, unsolved tasks is the key to learning diverse behaviors. In the multi-task domain, where an agent needs to reach multiple goals, the choice of training goals can largely affect sample efficiency. We propose setting up an automatic curriculum for goals that the agent needs to solve. We evaluate our method across 13 multi-goal robotic tasks and 5 navigation tasks, and demonstrate performance gains over current state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-17T03:58:25Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.