论文标题

强化学习中的解释性:观点和位置

Explainability in reinforcement learning: perspective and position

论文作者

Krajna, Agneza, Brcic, Mario, Lipic, Tomislav, Doncevic, Juraj

论文摘要

人工智能(AI)已嵌入人们日常生活的许多方面,人们为他们做出决定已成为正常的。强化学习(RL)模型增加了有关其他机器学习范式的可解决问题的空间。一些最有趣的应用程序是在未知或未定义的环境中运行的非差异性预期奖励功能的情况,以及算法发现超过任何老师的表现的算法,代理商通过简单的反馈从实验经验中学习。仅举几例,应用程序及其社会影响范围很大:基因组学,游戏(国际象棋,GO等),一般优化,金融投资,政府政策,自动驾驶汽车,推荐系统等。因此,通过解释来提高基于RL的系统的信任和透明度至关重要。大多数涉及人工智能中解释性的文章提供了涉及监督学习的方法,并且在RL领域涉及的文章很少。这样做的原因是信用分配问题,延迟的奖励以及无法假定数据是独立和相同分布的(i.i.d.)。该立场论文试图对可解释的RL区域中现有方法进行系统的概述,并提出一种新颖的统一分类法,建立和扩展现有方法。位置部分描述了如何观察解释性的务实方面。特别强调了接收和产生解释的各方之间的差距。为了减少差距并实现解释的诚实和真实性,我们建立了三个支柱:积极性,风险态度和认识论的约束。为此,我们说明了关于最短路径问题的简单变体的建议。

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been embedded into many aspects of people's daily lives and it has become normal for people to have AI make decisions for them. Reinforcement learning (RL) models increase the space of solvable problems with respect to other machine learning paradigms. Some of the most interesting applications are in situations with non-differentiable expected reward function, operating in unknown or underdefined environment, as well as for algorithmic discovery that surpasses performance of any teacher, whereby agent learns from experimental experience through simple feedback. The range of applications and their social impact is vast, just to name a few: genomics, game-playing (chess, Go, etc.), general optimization, financial investment, governmental policies, self-driving cars, recommendation systems, etc. It is therefore essential to improve the trust and transparency of RL-based systems through explanations. Most articles dealing with explainability in artificial intelligence provide methods that concern supervised learning and there are very few articles dealing with this in the area of RL. The reasons for this are the credit assignment problem, delayed rewards, and the inability to assume that data is independently and identically distributed (i.i.d.). This position paper attempts to give a systematic overview of existing methods in the explainable RL area and propose a novel unified taxonomy, building and expanding on the existing ones. The position section describes pragmatic aspects of how explainability can be observed. The gap between the parties receiving and generating the explanation is especially emphasized. To reduce the gap and achieve honesty and truthfulness of explanations, we set up three pillars: proactivity, risk attitudes, and epistemological constraints. To this end, we illustrate our proposal on simple variants of the shortest path problem.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源