Reinforcement Learning: A Survey

This paper surveys the field of reinforcement learning from a computer-science perspective. It is written to be accessible to researchers familiar with machine learning. Both the historical basis of the field and a broad selection of current work are summarized. Reinforcement learning is the problem faced by an agent that learns behavior through trial-and-error interactions with a dynamic environment. The work described here has a resemblance to work in psychology, but differs considerably in the details and in the use of the word ``reinforcement.'' The paper discusses central issues of reinforcement learning, including trading off exploration and exploitation, establishing the foundations of the field via Markov decision theory, learning from delayed reinforcement, constructing empirical models to accelerate learning, making use of generalization and hierarchy, and coping with hidden state. It concludes with a survey of some implemented systems and an assessment of the practical utility of current methods for reinforcement learning.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for any accompanying file

Projective simulation with generalization

The ability to generalize is an important feature of any intelligent agent. Not only because it may allow the agent to cope with large amounts of data, but also because in some environments, an agent with no generalization capabilities cannot learn. In this work we outline several criteria for generalization, and present a dynamic and autonomous machinery that enables projective simulation agents to meaningfully generalize. Projective simulation, a novel, physical approach to artificial intelligence, was recently shown to perform well in standard reinforcement learning problems, with applications in advanced robotics as well as quantum experiments. Both the basic projective simulation model and the presented generalization machinery are based on very simple principles. This allows us to provide a full analytical analysis of the agent's performance and to illustrate the benefit the agent gains by generalizing. Specifically, we show that already in basic (but extreme) environments, learning without generalization may be impossible, and demonstrate how the presented generalization machinery enables the projective simulation agent to learn.Comment: 14 pages, 9 figure

Combining Subgoal Graphs with Reinforcement Learning to Build a Rational Pathfinder

In this paper, we present a hierarchical path planning framework called SG-RL (subgoal graphs-reinforcement learning), to plan rational paths for agents maneuvering in continuous and uncertain environments. By "rational", we mean (1) efficient path planning to eliminate first-move lags; (2) collision-free and smooth for agents with kinematic constraints satisfied. SG-RL works in a two-level manner. At the first level, SG-RL uses a geometric path-planning method, i.e., Simple Subgoal Graphs (SSG), to efficiently find optimal abstract paths, also called subgoal sequences. At the second level, SG-RL uses an RL method, i.e., Least-Squares Policy Iteration (LSPI), to learn near-optimal motion-planning policies which can generate kinematically feasible and collision-free trajectories between adjacent subgoals. The first advantage of the proposed method is that SSG can solve the limitations of sparse reward and local minima trap for RL agents; thus, LSPI can be used to generate paths in complex environments. The second advantage is that, when the environment changes slightly (i.e., unexpected obstacles appearing), SG-RL does not need to reconstruct subgoal graphs and replan subgoal sequences using SSG, since LSPI can deal with uncertainties by exploiting its generalization ability to handle changes in environments. Simulation experiments in representative scenarios demonstrate that, compared with existing methods, SG-RL can work well on large-scale maps with relatively low action-switching frequencies and shorter path lengths, and SG-RL can deal with small changes in environments. We further demonstrate that the design of reward functions and the types of training environments are important factors for learning feasible policies.Comment: 20 page