This is a long overdue blog post on Reinforcement Learning (RL). You may have noticed that computers can now automatically learn to play ATARI games (from raw game pixels!), they are beating world champions at Go, simulated quadrupeds are learning to run and leap, and robots are learning how to perform complex manipulation tasks that defy explicit programming. It turns out that all of these advances fall under the umbrella of RL research. I also became interested in RL myself over the last year: I worked through Richard Sutton's book, read through David Silver's course, watched John Schulmann's lectures, wrote an RL library in Javascript, over the summer interned at DeepMind working in the DeepRL group, and most recently pitched in a little with the design/development of OpenAI Gym, a new RL benchmarking toolkit. So I've certainly been on this funwagon for at least a year but until now I haven't gotten around to writing up a short post on why RL is a big deal, what it's about, how it all developed and where it might be going. It's interesting to reflect on the nature of recent progress in RL. Similar to what happened in Computer Vision, the progress in RL is not driven as much as you might reasonably assume by new amazing ideas. In Computer Vision, the 2012 AlexNet was mostly a scaled up (deeper and wider) version of 1990's ConvNets. Similarly, the ATARI Deep Q Learning paper from 2013 is an implementation of a standard algorithm (Q Learning with function approximation, which you can find in the standard RL book of Sutton 1998), where the function approximator happened to be a ConvNet. AlphaGo uses policy gradients with Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) - these are also standard components.

This demo follows the description of the Deep Q Learning algorithm described in Playing Atari with Deep Reinforcement Learning, a paper from NIPS 2013 Deep Learning Workshop from DeepMind. The paper is a nice demo of a fairly standard (model-free) Reinforcement Learning algorithm (Q Learning) learning to play Atari games. In this demo, instead of Atari games, we'll start out with something more simple: a 2D agent that has 9 eyes pointing in different angles ahead and every eye senses 3 values along its direction (up to a certain maximum visibility distance): distance to a wall, distance to a green thing, or distance to a red thing. The agent navigates by using one of 5 actions that turn it different angles. The red things are apples and the agent gets reward for eating them. The green things are poison and the agent gets negative reward for eating them.

My favorite post in a while, look forward to seeing more. I actually have a question for you (or anyone else who reads this) I have some experience with Box2D and other stuff OpenAI/Gym uses and I'd love to create some games/sims that people could train there AI's for, is there a good guide line I could use when making these?

This is a long overdue blog post on Reinforcement Learning (RL). You may have noticed that computers can now automatically learn to play ATARI games (from raw game pixels!), they are beating world champions at Go, simulated quadrupeds are learning to run and leap, and robots are learning how to perform complex manipulation tasks that defy explicit programming. It turns out that all of these advances fall under the umbrella of RL research. I also became interested in RL myself over the last year: I worked through Richard Sutton's book, read through David Silver's course, watched John Schulmann's lectures, wrote an RL library in Javascript, over the summer interned at DeepMind working in the DeepRL group, and most recently pitched in a little with the design/development of OpenAI Gym, a new RL benchmarking toolkit. So I've certainly been on this funwagon for at least a year but until now I haven't gotten around to writing up a short post on why RL is a big deal, what it's about, how it all developed and where it might be going. It's interesting to reflect on the nature of recent progress in RL. Similar to what happened in Computer Vision, the progress in RL is not driven as much as you might reasonably assume by new amazing ideas. In Computer Vision, the 2012 AlexNet was mostly a scaled up (deeper and wider) version of 1990's ConvNets. Similarly, the ATARI Deep Q Learning paper from 2013 is an implementation of a standard algorithm (Q Learning with function approximation, which you can find in the standard RL book of Sutton 1998), where the function approximator happened to be a ConvNet. AlphaGo uses policy gradients with Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) - these are also standard components.

The theory of reinforcement learning provides a normative account, deeply rooted in psychological and neuroscientific perspectives on animal behaviour, of how agents may optimize their control of an environment. To use reinforcement learning successfully in situations approaching real-world complexity, however, agents are confronted with a difficult task: they must derive efficient representations of the environment from high-dimensional sensory inputs, and use these to generalize past experience to new situations. Remarkably, humans and other animals seem to solve this problem through a harmonious combination of reinforcement learning and hierarchical sensory processing systems, the former evidenced by a wealth of neural data revealing notable parallels between the phasic signals emitted by dopaminergic neurons and temporal difference reinforcement learning algorithms. While reinforcement learning agents have achieved some successes in a variety of domains, their applicability has previously been limited to domains in which useful features can be handcrafted, or to domains with fully observed, low-dimensional state spaces. Here we use recent advances in training deep neural networks to develop a novel artificial agent, termed a deep Q-network, that can learn successful policies directly from high-dimensional sensory inputs using end-to-end reinforcement learning.

It is taught, mostly in graduate school control theory courses which are typically found in ece departments. Typically called "linear systems" as a starter course, there is not really a standard textbook as it can be taught as pure math or as a more applied subject. For nonlinear systems, which deals more with theoretical things such as existence of solutions, the textbook by khalil is pretty standard. I'm pretty sure there are some decent YouTube lecture series on state space control. They should discuss controllability/observability, some basic feedback schemes, etc. Oddly, a lot of control theory is more concerned with examining systems than with actually developing controllers... Most modern work in control theory is state space as opposed to classical frequency response methods as it handles multiple input multiple output systems much better.

Reinforcement learning for embodied agents is a challenging problem. The accumulated reward to be optimized is often a very rugged function, and gradient methods are impaired by many local optimizers. We demonstrate, in an experimental setting, that incorporating an intrinsic reward can smoothen the optimization landscape while preserving the global optimizers of interest. We show that policy gradient optimization for locomotion in a complex morphology is significantly improved when supplementing the extrinsic reward by an intrinsic reward defined in terms of the mutual information of time consecutive sensor readings.

Learning goal-directed behavior in environments with sparse feedback is a major challenge for reinforcement learning algorithms. The primary difficulty arises due to insufficient exploration, resulting in an agent being unable to learn robust value functions. Intrinsically motivated agents can explore new behavior for its own sake rather than to directly solve problems. Such intrinsic behaviors could eventually help the agent solve tasks posed by the environment. We present hierarchical-DQN (h-DQN), a framework to integrate hierarchical value functions, operating at different temporal scales, with intrinsically motivated deep reinforcement learning. A top-level value function learns a policy over intrinsic goals, and a lower-level function learns a policy over atomic actions to satisfy the given goals. h-DQN allows for flexible goal specifications, such as functions over entities and relations. This provides an efficient space for exploration in complicated environments. We demonstrate the strength of our approach on two problems with very sparse, delayed feedback: (1) a complex discrete stochastic decision process, and (2) the classic ATARI game `Montezuma's Revenge'.

Reinforcement learning offers a promising methodology for developing skills for simulated characters, but typically requires working with sparse hand-crafted features. Building on recent progress in deep reinforcement learning (DeepRL), we introduce a mixture of actor-critic experts (MACE) approach that learns terrain-adaptive dynamic locomotion skills using high-dimensional state and terrain descriptions as input, and parameterized leaps or steps as output actions. MACE learns more quickly than a single actor-critic approach and results in actor-critic experts that exhibit specialization. Additional elements of our solution that contribute towards efficient learning include Boltzmann exploration and the use of initial actor biases to encourage specialization. Results are demonstrated for multiple planar characters and terrain classes.

We study the problem of off-policy value evaluation in reinforcement learning (RL), where one aims to estimate the value of a new policy based on data collected by a different policy. This problem is often a critical step when applying RL to real-world problems. Despite its importance, existing general methods either have uncontrolled bias or suffer high variance. In this work, we extend the doubly robust estimator for bandits to sequential decision-making problems, which gets the best of both worlds: it is guaranteed to be unbiased and can have a much lower variance than the popular importance sampling estimators. We demonstrate the estimator's accuracy in several benchmark problems, and illustrate its use as a subroutine in safe policy improvement. We also provide theoretical results on the inherent hardness of the problem, and show that our estimator can match the lower bound in certain scenarios.