Cited by 69Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningAdaptive Dynamic Programming Control

Risk Averse Robust Adversarial Reinforcement Learning

Open access
Pan, Xinlei, Seita, Daniel, Gao, Yang, Canny, John·2019·2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

Abstract

Deep reinforcement learning has recently made significant progress in solving computer games and robotic control tasks. A known problem, though, is that policies overfit to the training environment and may not avoid rare, catastrophic events such as automotive accidents. A classical technique for improving the robustness of reinforcement learning algorithms is to train on a set of randomized environments, but this approach only guards against common situations. Recently, robust adversarial reinforcement learning (RARL) was developed, which allows efficient applications of random and systematic perturbations by a trained adversary. A limitation of RARL is that only the expected control objective is optimized; there is no explicit modeling or optimization of risk. Thus the agents do not consider the probability of catastrophic events (i.e., those inducing abnormally large negative reward), except through their effect on the expected objective. In this paper we introduce risk-averse robust adversarial reinforcement learning (RARARL), using a risk-averse protagonist and a risk-seeking adversary. We test our approach on a self-driving vehicle controller. We use an ensemble of policy networks to model risk as the variance of value functions. We show through experiments that a risk-averse agent is better equipped to handle a risk-seeking adversary, and experiences substantially fewer crashes compared to agents trained without an adversary. Supplementary materials are available at https://sites.google.com/view/rararl.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icra.2019.8794293

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The algorithm has been tested in a simulated self-driving task and obtained experimental results highlighting the better robustness of RARARL controller with respect to one subjected to random perturbation in training.

    “The algorithm has been tested in a simulated self-driving task and obtained experimental results highlighting the better robustness of RARARL controller with respect to one subjected to random perturbation in training.”
  • Pan et al. [58] builds on the RARL idea by introducing the Risk-Averse Robust Adversarial RL (RARARL) concept: a RARL algorithm in which the protagonist is trained to be risk-averse and the adversarial, in contrast, risk-seeking.

    “Pan et al. [58] builds on the RARL idea by introducing the Risk-Averse Robust Adversarial RL (RARARL) concept: a RARL algorithm in which the protagonist is trained to be risk-averse and the adversarial, in contrast, risk-seeking.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pan, X., Seita, D., Gao, Y., & Canny, J.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-05
Pages
8522-8528
ISSN
1050-4729 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2967292964
Cited by
69
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5
FWCI
3.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • UC Berkeley (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Physical Science Consortium
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Adaptive Dynamic Programming Control
Keywords
catastrophic events, overfitting, adversarial perturbations, autonomous driving safety

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