PreprintCited by 139Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsArtificial Intelligence in GamesAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research

Surprise-Based Intrinsic Motivation for Deep Reinforcement Learning

Open access
Achiam, Joshua, Sastry, Shankar·2017·arXiv

Abstract

Exploration in complex domains is a key challenge in reinforcement learning, especially for tasks with very sparse rewards. Recent successes in deep reinforcement learning have been achieved mostly using simple heuristic exploration strategies such as $ε$-greedy action selection or Gaussian control noise, but there are many tasks where these methods are insufficient to make any learning progress. Here, we consider more complex heuristics: efficient and scalable exploration strategies that maximize a notion of an agent's surprise about its experiences via intrinsic motivation. We propose to learn a model of the MDP transition probabilities concurrently with the policy, and to form intrinsic rewards that approximate the KL-divergence of the true transition probabilities from the learned model. One of our approximations results in using surprisal as intrinsic motivation, while the other gives the $k$-step learning progress. We show that our incentives enable agents to succeed in a wide range of environments with high-dimensional state spaces and very sparse rewards, including continuous control tasks and games in the Atari RAM domain, outperforming several other heuristic exploration techniques.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1703.01732

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. [2][2] Marc G Bellemare, Sriram Srinivasan, Georg Ostrovski, Tom Schaul, David Saxton, Google Deepmind, and Rémi Munos. Unifying Count-Based Exploration and Intrinsic Motivation. arXiv , (Im), 2016. -
  2. [3][3] Ronen I Brafman and Moshe Tennenholtz. R-max - A General Polynomial Time Algorithm for Near-Optimal Reinforcement Learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 3:213-231, 2002. -
  3. [5][5] Yan Duan, Xi Chen, John Schulman, and Pieter Abbeel. Benchmarking Deep Reinforcement Learning for Continuous Control. The 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2016) (2016) , 48:14, 2016. -
  4. [7][7] Rein Houthooft, Xi Chen, Yan Duan, John Schulman, Filip De Turck, and Pieter Abbeel. Variational Information Maximizing Exploration. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) (2016) , 2016. -
  5. [8][8] Laurent Itti and Pierre Baldi. Bayesian surprise attracts human attention. Vision Research , 49(10):1295-1306, 2009. -
  6. [9][9] Thomas Jaksch, Ronald Ortner, and Peter Auer. Near-optimal Regret Bounds for Reinforcement Learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 11(1):1563-1600, 2010. -
  7. [10][10] Michael Kearns and Satinder Singh. Near Optimal Reinforcement Learning in Polynomial Time. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning , pages 260-268, 1998. -
  8. [11][11] Manuel Lopes, Tobias Lang, Marc Toussaint, and Py Oudeyer. Exploration in model-based reinforcement learning by empirically estimating learning progress. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) (2012) , 2012. -
  9. [12][12] Volodymyr Mnih, Adrià Puigdomènech Badia, Mehdi Mirza, Alex Graves, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Tim Harley, David Silver, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. Asynchronous Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learning. In ICML, 2016 , 2016. -
  10. [13][13] Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Andrei a Rusu, Joel Veness, Marc G Bellemare, Alex Graves, Martin Riedmiller, Andreas K Fidjeland, Georg Ostrovski, Stig Petersen, Charles Beattie, Amir Sadik, Ioannis Antonoglou, Helen King, Dharshan Kumaran, Daan Wierstra, Shane Legg, and Demis Hassabis. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature , 518(7540):529-533, 2015. -
  11. [14][14] Shakir Mohamed and Danilo J Rezende. Variational Information Maximisation for Intrinsically Motivated Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 29th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2015) , 2015. -
  12. [15][15] Arun Nair, Praveen Srinivasan, Sam Blackwell, Cagdas Alcicek, Rory Fearon, Alessandro De Maria, Mustafa Suleyman, Charles Beattie, Stig Petersen, Shane Legg, Volodymyr Mnih, and David Silver. Massively Parallel Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learning. ICML Deep Learning Workshop 2015 , 2015. -
  13. [16][16] Junhyuk Oh, Guo Xiaoxiao, Lee Honglak, Lewis Richard, and Singh Satinder. ActionConditional Video Prediction using Deep Networks in Atari Games. In NIPS 2015 , 2015. -
  14. [17][17] Pierre-Yves Oudeyer and Frederic Kaplan. How can we define intrinsic motivation? In 8th International Conference on Epigenetic Robotics , 2008. -
  15. [18][18] Jason Pazis and Ronald Parr. PAC Optimal Exploration in Continuous Space Markov Decision Processes. pages 774-781, 2013. -
  16. [19][19] Jürgen Schmidhuber. Curious Model-Building Control Systems. International Joint Conference on Neural Networks , 2:1458-1463, 1991. -
  17. [20][20] John Schulman, Philipp Moritz, Michael Jordan, and Pieter Abbeel. Trust Region Policy Optimization. In ICML, 2015 , 2015. -
  18. [21][21] John Schulman, Philipp Moritz, Sergey Levine, Michael Jordan, and Pieter Abbeel. HighDimensional Continuous Control Using Generalized Advantage Estimation. In ICLR, 2016 , 2016. -
  19. [22][22] Bradly C. Stadie, Sergey Levine, and Pieter Abbeel. Incentivizing Exploration In Reinforcement Learning With Deep Predictive Models. arXiv , 2015. -
  20. [23][23] Jan Storck, Sepp Hochreiter, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Reinforcement driven information acquisition in non-deterministic environments. In Proceedings of the International . . . , volume 2, pages 159-164, 1995. -
  21. [26][26] Ziyu Wang, Nando de Freitas, and Marc Lanctot. Dueling Network Architectures for Deep Reinforcement Learning. arXiv , (9), 2016.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Achiam, J., & Sastry, S.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2017
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2593766708
Cited by
139
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Science Foundation (0424422)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Advanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Keywords
intrinsic motivation, exploration, deep reinforcement learning, surprise, sparse rewards, model-based reinforcement learning, Kullback-Leibler divergence, continuous control, Atari games

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