Target-driven visual navigation in indoor scenes using deep reinforcement learning
Open accessAbstract
Two less addressed issues of deep reinforcement learning are (1) lack of generalization capability to new goals, and (2) data inefficiency, i.e., the model requires several (and often costly) episodes of trial and error to converge, which makes it impractical to be applied to real-world scenarios. In this paper, we address these two issues and apply our model to target-driven visual navigation. To address the first issue, we propose an actor-critic model whose policy is a function of the goal as well as the current state, which allows better generalization. To address the second issue, we propose the AI2-THOR framework, which provides an environment with high-quality 3D scenes and a physics engine. Our framework enables agents to take actions and interact with objects. Hence, we can collect a huge number of training samples efficiently. We show that our proposed method (1) converges faster than the state-of-the-art deep reinforcement learning methods, (2) generalizes across targets and scenes, (3) generalizes to a real robot scenario with a small amount of fine-tuning (although the model is trained in simulation), (4) is end-to-end trainable and does not need feature engineering, feature matching between frames or 3D reconstruction of the environment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Instruction-following navigation relies on R2R and REVERIE tasks, enhancing natural language interaction and environment-specific reasoning, and highlighting multimodal perception in complex scenarios.
“Instructionfollowing Navigation relies on the development of Room-to-Room (R2R) and REVERIE tasks, which enhances natural language interaction and environment-specific reasoning, and further highlights the role of multimodal perception in complex scenarios [111,31,112,113].”
From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [112]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 1,533
- Authors
- Zhu, Y., Mottaghi, R., Kolve, E., Lim, J. J., Gupta, A., Fei-Fei, L., & Farhadi, A.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence (US)
- University of Southern California (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Venue
- 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2017-05
- Pages
- 3357-3364
- ISSN
- 1050-4729 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2962887844
- Cited by
- 1,533
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 51 · 2025: 130 · 2024: 141 · 2023: 172 · 2022: 174 · 2021: 222 · 2020: 233 · 2019: 223 · 2018: 141 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 79.96
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Robotics and Sensor-Based Localization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Keywords
- indoor navigation, deep reinforcement learning, goal-conditioned policies, actor-critic, data efficiency, AI2-THOR, 3D simulation environment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review