The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Robust Reinforcement Learning
Abstract
This letter proposes a new reinforcement learning (RL) paradigm that explicitly takes into account input disturbance as well as modeling errors. The use of environmental models in RL is quite popular for both off-line learning using simulations and for online action planning. However, the difference between the model and the real environment can lead to unpredictable, and often unwanted, results. Based on the theory of H∞ control, we consider a differential game in which a “disturbing” agent tries to make the worst possible disturbance while a “control” agent tries to make the best control input. The problem is formulated as finding a min-max solution of a value function that takes into account the amount of the reward and the norm of the disturbance. We derive online learning algorithms for estimating the value function and for calculating the worst disturbance and the best control in reference to the value function. We tested the paradigm, which we call robust reinforcement learning (RRL), on the control task of an inverted pendulum. In the linear domain, the policy and the value function learned by online algorithms coincided with those derived analytically by the linear H∞ control theory. For a fully nonlinear swing-up task, RRL achieved robust performance with changes in the pendulum weight and friction, while a standard reinforcement learning algorithm could not deal with these changes. We also applied RRL to the cart-pole swing-up task, and a robust swing-up policy was acquired.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
Robust RL was proposed quite early as a new RL paradigm that explicitly takes into account input disturbances as well as modeling errors.
“Robust RL [23] was proposed quite early as a new RL paradigm that explicitly takes into account input disturbances as well as modeling errors.”
From Sim-to-Real Transfer in Deep Reinforcement Learning for Robotics: a Survey (2020) · cites this paper as [23]
Domain randomization and dynamics randomization methods focus on introducing perturbations in simulation environments with the aim of making agents less susceptible to mismatches between simulation and reality.
“Domain randomization and dynamics randomization methods focus on introducing perturbations in the simulation environments with the aim of making the agents less susceptible to the mismatches between simulation and reality [30], [38], [40].”
From Sim-to-Real Transfer in Deep Reinforcement Learning for Robotics: a Survey (2020) · cites this paper as [40]
Robotic manipulation tasks that have been possible with DRL range from learning peg-in-hole tasks to deformable object manipulation, including more dexterous manipulation with multi-fingered hands, or learning force control policies.
“Robotic manipulation tasks that have been possible with DRL ranging from learning peg-in-hole tasks [40] to deformable object manipulation [6], and including more dexterous manipulation with multi-fingered hands [5], or learning force control policies [78].”
From Sim-to-Real Transfer in Deep Reinforcement Learning for Robotics: a Survey (2020) · cites this paper as [40]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 14 · Cited by 232
Metadata
- Authors
- Morimoto, J., & Doya, K.
- Affiliations
- Japan Science and Technology Agency (JP)
- Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Morimoto, Jun
- Doya, Kenji
- Venue
- Neural Computation
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2005-02-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 335-359
- ISSN
- 0899-7667 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-888X
- OpenAlex
- W2105078254
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neural Computation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Adaptive Dynamic Programming Control
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
- Keywords
- robust reinforcement learning, H-infinity control, input perturbation, model error, online learning algorithms, value function estimation, inverted pendulum
- MeSH terms
- Learning, Reinforcement, Psychology, Neural Networks, Computer
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