Active inference for action-unaware agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.12027v1
• Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:27:51 GMT
• Title: Active inference for action-unaware agents
• Authors: Filippo Torresan, Keisuke Suzuki, Ryota Kanai, Manuel Baltieri,
• Abstract summary: Active inference is a formal approach to study cognition based on the notion that adaptive agents can be seen as engaging in a process of approximate Bayesian inference.<n>We show how action-unaware agents can achieve performances comparable to action-aware ones while at a severe disadvantage.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Active inference is a formal approach to study cognition based on the notion that adaptive agents can be seen as engaging in a process of approximate Bayesian inference, via the minimisation of variational and expected free energies. Minimising the former provides an account of perceptual processes and learning as evidence accumulation, while minimising the latter describes how agents select their actions over time. In this way, adaptive agents are able to maximise the likelihood of preferred observations or states, given a generative model of the environment. In the literature, however, different strategies have been proposed to describe how agents can plan their future actions. While they all share the notion that some kind of expected free energy offers an appropriate way to score policies, sequences of actions, in terms of their desirability, there are different ways to consider the contribution of past motor experience to the agent's future behaviour. In some approaches, agents are assumed to know their own actions, and use such knowledge to better plan for the future. In other approaches, agents are unaware of their actions, and must infer their motor behaviour from recent observations in order to plan for the future. This difference reflects a standard point of departure in two leading frameworks in motor control based on the presence, or not, of an efference copy signal representing knowledge about an agent's own actions. In this work we compare the performances of action-aware and action-unaware agents in two navigations tasks, showing how action-unaware agents can achieve performances comparable to action-aware ones while at a severe disadvantage.

Related papers

• SAND: Boosting LLM Agents with Self-Taught Action Deliberation [53.732649189709285]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents are commonly tuned with supervised finetuning on ReAct-style expert trajectories or preference optimization over pairwise rollouts.<n>We propose Self-taught ActioN Deliberation (SAND) framework, enabling LLM agents to explicitly deliberate over candidate actions before committing to one.<n>SAND achieves an average 20% improvement over initial supervised finetuning and also outperforms state-of-the-art agent tuning approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T05:38:15Z)
• Model Editing as a Double-Edged Sword: Steering Agent Ethical Behavior Toward Beneficence or Harm [57.00627691433355]
  We frame agent behavior steering as a model editing task, which we term Behavior Editing.<n>We introduce BehaviorBench, a benchmark grounded in psychological moral theories.<n>We demonstrate that Behavior Editing can be used to promote ethical and benevolent behavior or, conversely, to induce harmful or malicious behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T16:51:51Z)
• Predicting Future Actions of Reinforcement Learning Agents [27.6973598477153]
  This paper experimentally evaluates and compares the effectiveness of future action and event prediction for three types of reinforcement learning agents. We employ two approaches: the inner state approach, which involves predicting based on the inner computations of the agents, and a simulation-based approach, which involves unrolling the agent in a learned world model. Using internal plans proves more robust to model quality compared to simulation-based approaches when predicting actions, while the results for event prediction are more mixed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T18:48:18Z)
• CAMMARL: Conformal Action Modeling in Multi Agent Reinforcement Learning [5.865719902445064]
  We propose a novel multi-agent reinforcement learning algorithm CAMMARL. It involves modeling the actions of other agents in different situations in the form of confident sets. We show that CAMMARL elevates the capabilities of an autonomous agent in MARL by modeling conformal prediction sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-19T19:03:53Z)
• Moving Forward by Moving Backward: Embedding Action Impact over Action Semantics [57.671493865825255]
  We propose to model the impact of actions on-the-fly using latent embeddings. By combining these latent action embeddings with a novel, transformer-based, policy head, we design an Action Adaptive Policy. We show that our AAP is highly performant even when faced, at inference-time with missing actions and, previously unseen, perturbed action space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-24T17:35:47Z)
• Self-directed Learning of Action Models using Exploratory Planning [6.796748304066826]
  We describe a novel exploratory planning agent that is capable of learning action preconditions and effects without expert traces or a given goal. The contributions of this work include a new representation for contexts called Lifted Linked Clauses, a novel exploration action selection approach using these clauses, and an empirical evaluation in a scenario from an exploration-focused video game.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-07T15:57:10Z)
• Explaining Reinforcement Learning Policies through Counterfactual Trajectories [147.7246109100945]
  A human developer must validate that an RL agent will perform well at test-time. Our method conveys how the agent performs under distribution shifts by showing the agent's behavior across a wider trajectory distribution. In a user study, we demonstrate that our method enables users to score better than baseline methods on one of two agent validation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-29T00:52:37Z)
• Deceptive Decision-Making Under Uncertainty [25.197098169762356]
  We study the design of autonomous agents that are capable of deceiving outside observers about their intentions while carrying out tasks. By modeling the agent's behavior as a Markov decision process, we consider a setting where the agent aims to reach one of multiple potential goals. We propose a novel approach to model observer predictions based on the principle of maximum entropy and to efficiently generate deceptive strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-14T14:56:23Z)
• Instance-Aware Predictive Navigation in Multi-Agent Environments [93.15055834395304]
  We propose an Instance-Aware Predictive Control (IPC) approach, which forecasts interactions between agents as well as future scene structures. We adopt a novel multi-instance event prediction module to estimate the possible interaction among agents in the ego-centric view. We design a sequential action sampling strategy to better leverage predicted states on both scene-level and instance-level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-14T22:21:25Z)
• Domain-independent generation and classification of behavior traces [18.086782548507855]
  CABBOT is a learning technique that allows the agent to perform on-line classification of the type of planning agent whose behavior is observing. We present experiments in several (both financial and non-financial) domains with promising results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-03T16:58:54Z)
• What can I do here? A Theory of Affordances in Reinforcement Learning [65.70524105802156]
  We develop a theory of affordances for agents who learn and plan in Markov Decision Processes. Affordances play a dual role in this case, by reducing the number of actions available in any given situation. We propose an approach to learn affordances and use it to estimate transition models that are simpler and generalize better.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-26T16:34:53Z)

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.