Cited by 21Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningMachine Learning and Algorithms

Blind spot detection for safe sim-to-real transfer

Open access
Ramakrishnan, Ramya, Kamar, Ece, Dey, Debadeepta, Horvitz, Eric, Shah, Julie·2020·Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Abstract

Agents trained in simulation may make errors when performing actions in the real world due to mismatches between training and execution environments. These mistakes can be dangerous and difficult for the agent to discover because the agent is unable to predict them a priori. In this work, we propose the use of oracle feedback to learn a predictive model of these blind spots in order to reduce costly errors in real-world applications. We focus on blind spots in reinforcement learning (RL) that occur due to incomplete state representation: when the agent lacks necessary features to represent the true state of the world, and thus cannot distinguish between numerous states. We formalize the problem of discovering blind spots in RL as a noisy supervised learning problem with class imbalance. Our system learns models for predicting blind spots within unseen regions of the state space by combining techniques for label aggregation, calibration, and supervised learning. These models take into consideration noise emerging from different forms of oracle feedback, including demonstrations and corrections. We evaluate our approach across two domains and demonstrate that it achieves higher predictive performance than baseline methods, and also that the learned model can be used to selectively query an oracle at execution time to prevent errors. We also empirically analyze the biases of various feedback types and how these biases influence the discovery of blind spots. Further, we include analyses of our approach that incorporate relaxed initial optimality assumptions. (Interestingly, relaxing the assumptions of an optimal oracle and an optimal simulator policy helped our models to perform better.) We also propose extensions to our method that are intended to improve performance when using corrections and demonstrations data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1613/jair.1.11436

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There is always a risk that the agent will encounter novel states in actual trials that it did not encounter in simulation.

    “Additionally, there is always a risk that the agent will encounter novel states in the actual trials that it did not encounter in simulation [82].”
  • An agent deployed in the real world will potentially be exposed to novel experiences that were not present in the simulations, as well as the potential need to adapt their policies to encompass wider sets of tasks.

    “Another key aspect to take into account is that an agent deployed in the real world will potentially be exposed to novel experiences that were not present in the simulations [10], as well as the potential need to adapt their policies to encompass wider sets of tasks.”
  • On the sensing part, the problem can be considered wider, as it also involves the more general ML problem of facing situations in the real world that have not appeared in simulation.

    “On the sensing part, however, the problem can be considered wider, as it also involves the more general ML problem of facing situations in the real world that have not appeared in simulation [10].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 94 · Cited by 21

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Gal, Y. (2016). Uncertainty in deep learning. Ph.D. thesis, PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.
  2. Isele, D., Rostami, M., & Eaton, E. (2016b). Using task features for zero-shot knowledge transfer in lifelong learning.. In IJCAI, pp. 1620-1626.
  3. Julian, R., Heiden, E., He, Z., Zhang, H., Schaal, S., Lim, J., Sukhatme, G., & Hausman, K. (2018). Scaling simulation-to-real transfer by learning composable robot skills. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.10253. · arXiv
  4. Kurakin, A., Goodfellow, I., & Bengio, S. (2016). Adversarial examples in the physical world. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.02533. · arXiv
  5. Markou, M., & Singh, S. (2003a). Novelty detection: a reviewpart 1: statistical approaches. Signal processing, 83 (12), 2481-2497.
  6. Markou, M., & Singh, S. (2003b). Novelty detection: a reviewpart 2:: neural network based approaches. Signal processing, 83 (12), 2499-2521.
  7. Peng, X. B., Andrychowicz, M., Zaremba, W., & Abbeel, P. (2018). Sim-to-real transfer of robotic control with dynamics randomization. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1-8. IEEE.
  8. Ramakrishnan, R., Narasimhan, K., & Shah, J. (2016). Interpretable transfer for reinforce- ment learning based on object similarities. In Proceedings of the IJCAI Interactive Machine Learning Workshop. sn.
  9. Roy, N., & McCallum, A. (2001). Toward optimal active learning through monte carlo estimation of error reduction. ICML, Williamstown, 441-448.
  10. Shaham, U., Yamada, Y., & Negahban, S. (2015). Understanding adversarial training: Increasing local stability of neural nets through robust optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.05432. · arXiv

Authors
Ramakrishnan, R., Kamar, E., Dey, D., Horvitz, E., & Shah, J.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Microsoft (United States) (US)
Venue
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Published
2020-02-04
Volume
67
Pages
191-234
ISSN
1076-9757 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3004712215
Cited by
21
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
Keywords
blind spot detection, sim-to-real transfer, reinforcement learning, class imbalance, label aggregation, calibration, demonstrations, corrections

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