Towards Deep Symbolic Reinforcement Learning
Open accessAbstract
Deep reinforcement learning (DRL) brings the power of deep neural networks to bear on the generic task of trial-and-error learning, and its effectiveness has been convincingly demonstrated on tasks such as Atari video games and the game of Go. However, contemporary DRL systems inherit a number of shortcomings from the current generation of deep learning techniques. For example, they require very large datasets to work effectively, entailing that they are slow to learn even when such datasets are available. Moreover, they lack the ability to reason on an abstract level, which makes it difficult to implement high-level cognitive functions such as transfer learning, analogical reasoning, and hypothesis-based reasoning. Finally, their operation is largely opaque to humans, rendering them unsuitable for domains in which verifiability is important. In this paper, we propose an end-to-end reinforcement learning architecture comprising a neural back end and a symbolic front end with the potential to overcome each of these shortcomings. As proof-of-concept, we present a preliminary implementation of the architecture and apply it to several variants of a simple video game. We show that the resulting system -- though just a prototype -- learns effectively, and, by acquiring a set of symbolic rules that are easily comprehensible to humans, dramatically outperforms a conventional, fully neural DRL system on a stochastic variant of the game.
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?
Combining connectionist and symbolic paradigms seems a favourable way to address the challenge of explainability in DL.
“Combining connectionist and symbolic paradigms seems a favourable way to address this challenge [169, 299, 312, 352, 353].”
From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI (2020) · cites this paper as [312]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Barredo Arrieta, A., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Bennetot, A., Tabik, S., Barbado, A., Garcia, S., Gil-Lopez, S., Molina, D., Benjamins, R., et al. (2020) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012 · Cited by 10,423 · see citing works
The neuroconnectionist research programme
Doerig, A., Sommers, R. P., Seeliger, K., Richards, B., Ismael, J., Lindsay, G. W., Kording, K. P., Konkle, T., van Gerven, M. A. J., Kriegeskorte, N., et al. (2023) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-023-00705-w · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Abstraction for Deep Reinforcement Learning
Shanahan, M., & Mitchell, M. (2022) · Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2022/780 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Garnelo, M., Arulkumaran, K., & Shanahan, M.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2016
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1609.05518
- OpenAlex
- W2521274174
- Cited by
- 146
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 7
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Nvidia
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Keywords
- deep reinforcement learning, hybrid neural-symbolic architecture, symbolic rules, abstract thinking, transfer learning, analogical reasoning, explainability, verifiability, video games, end-to-end learning
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