The social implications of algorithmic decision-making in sensitive contexts have generated lively debates among multiple stakeholders, suc h as moral and political philosophers, computer scientists, and the public. Yet, the lack of a common language and a conceptual framework for an appropriate bridging of the mor al, technical, and political aspects of the debate prevents the discussion to be as effective a s it can be. Social scientists and psychologists are contributing to this debate by gather ing a wealth of empirical data, yet a philosophical analysis of the social implications of a lgorithmic decision-making remains comparatively impoverished. In attempting to address this lacuna, this paper argues that a hierarchy of different types of explanations for why and how an algorithmic decision outcome is achieved can establish the relevant connection between t he moral and technical aspects of algorithmic decision-making. In particular, I offer a multifaceted conceptual framework for the explanations and the interpretations of algorithmic de cisions, and I claim that this framework can lay the groundwork for a focused discussion among mu ltiple stakeholders about the social implications of algorithmic decision-making, as we ll as AI governance and ethics more generally.

In reinforcement learning (RL), an autonomous agent learns to perform complex tasks by maximizing an exogenous reward signal while interacting with its environment. In real-world applications, test conditions may differ substantially from the training scenario and, therefore, focusing on pure reward maximization during training may lead to poor results at test time. In these cases, it is important to trade-off between performance and robustness while learning a policy. While several results exist for robust, model-based RL, the model-free case has not been widely investigated. In this paper, we cast the robust, model-free RL problem as a multi-objective optimization problem. To quantify the robustness of a policy, we use delay margin and gain margin, two robustness indicators that are common in control theory. We show how these metrics can be estimated from data in the model-free setting. We use multi-objective Bayesian optimization (MOBO) to solve efficiently this expensive-to-evaluate, multi-objective optimization problem. We show the benefits of our robust formulation both in sim-to-real and pure hardware experiments to balance a Furuta pendulum.

Given a Boolean formula $\phi(x)$ in conjunctive normal form (CNF), the density of states counts the number of variable assignments that violate exactly $e$ clauses, for all values of $e$. Thus, the density of states is a histogram of the number of unsatisfied clauses over all possible assignments. This computation generalizes both maximum-satisfiability (MAX-SAT) and model counting problems and not only provides insight into the entire solution space, but also yields a measure for the \emph{hardness} of the problem instance. Consequently, in real-world scenarios, this problem is typically infeasible even when using state-of-the-art algorithms. While finding an exact answer to this problem is a computationally intensive task, we propose a novel approach for estimating density of states based on the concentration of measure inequalities. The methodology results in a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO), which is particularly amenable to quantum annealing-based solutions. We present the overall approach and compare results from the D-Wave quantum annealer against the best-known classical algorithms such as the Hamze-de Freitas-Selby (HFS) algorithm and satisfiability modulo theory (SMT) solvers.

Autonomous agents must often deal with conflicting requirements, such as completing tasks using the least amount of time/energy, learning multiple tasks, or dealing with multiple opponents. In the context of reinforcement learning~(RL), these problems are addressed by (i)~designing a reward function that simultaneously describes all requirements or (ii)~combining modular value functions that encode them individually. Though effective, these methods have critical downsides. Designing good reward functions that balance different objectives is challenging, especially as the number of objectives grows. Moreover, implicit interference between goals may lead to performance plateaus as they compete for resources, particularly when training on-policy. Similarly, selecting parameters to combine value functions is at least as hard as designing an all-encompassing reward, given that the effect of their values on the overall policy is not straightforward. The later is generally addressed by formulating the conflicting requirements as a constrained RL problem and solved using Primal-Dual methods. These algorithms are in general not guaranteed to converge to the optimal solution since the problem is not convex. This work provides theoretical support to these approaches by establishing that despite its non-convexity, this problem has zero duality gap, i.e., it can be solved exactly in the dual domain, where it becomes convex. Finally, we show this result basically holds if the policy is described by a good parametrization~(e.g., neural networks) and we connect this result with primal-dual algorithms present in the literature and we establish the convergence to the optimal solution.

Iterative hard thresholding (IHT) is a projected gradient descent algorithm, known to achieve state of the art performance for a wide range of structured estimation problems, such as sparse inference. In this work, we consider IHT as a solution to the problem of learning sparse discrete distributions. We study the hardness of using IHT on the space of measures. As a practical alternative, we propose a greedy approximate projection which simultaneously captures appropriate notions of sparsity in distributions, while satisfying the simplex constraint, and investigate the convergence behavior of the resulting procedure in various settings. Our results show, both in theory and practice, that IHT can achieve state of the art results for learning sparse distributions.

Applying Bayesian optimization in problems wherein the search space is unknown is challenging. To address this problem, we propose a systematic volume expansion strategy for the Bayesian optimization. We devise a strategy to guarantee that in iterative expansions of the search space, our method can find a point whose function value within epsilon of the objective function maximum. Without the need to specify any parameters, our algorithm automatically triggers a minimal expansion required iteratively. We derive analytic expressions for when to trigger the expansion and by how much to expand. We also provide theoretical analysis to show that our method achieves epsilon-accuracy after a finite number of iterations. We demonstrate our method on both benchmark test functions and machine learning hyper-parameter tuning tasks and demonstrate that our method outperforms baselines.

Dynamic Programming (DP) provides standard algorithms to solve Markov Decision Processes. However, these algorithms generally do not optimize a scalar objective function. In this paper, we draw connections between DP and (constrained) convex optimization. Specifically, we show clear links in the algorithmic structure between three DP schemes and optimization algorithms. We link Conservative Policy Iteration to Frank-Wolfe, Mirror-Descent Modified Policy Iteration to Mirror Descent, and Politex (Policy Iteration Using Expert Prediction) to Dual Averaging. These abstract DP schemes are representative of a number of (deep) Reinforcement Learning (RL) algorithms. By highlighting these connections (most of which have been noticed earlier, but in a scattered way), we would like to encourage further studies linking RL and convex optimization, that could lead to the design of new, more efficient, and better understood RL algorithms.

Recent work has shown how to embed differentiable optimization problems (that is, problems whose solutions can be backpropagated through) as layers within deep learning architectures. This method provides a useful inductive bias for certain problems, but existing software for differentiable optimization layers is rigid and difficult to apply to new settings. In this paper, we propose an approach to differentiating through disciplined convex programs, a subclass of convex optimization problems used by domain-specific languages (DSLs) for convex optimization. We introduce disciplined parametrized programming, a subset of disciplined convex programming, and we show that every disciplined parametrized program can be represented as the composition of an affine map from parameters to problem data, a solver, and an affine map from the solver's solution to a solution of the original problem (a new form we refer to as affine-solver-affine form). We then demonstrate how to efficiently differentiate through each of these components, allowing for end-to-end analytical differentiation through the entire convex program. We implement our methodology in version 1.1 of CVXPY, a popular Python-embedded DSL for convex optimization, and additionally implement differentiable layers for disciplined convex programs in PyTorch and TensorFlow 2.0. Our implementation significantly lowers the barrier to using convex optimization problems in differentiable programs. We present applications in linear machine learning models and in stochastic control, and we show that our layer is competitive (in execution time) compared to specialized differentiable solvers from past work.

Bayesian optimization has recently emerged as a popular method for the sample-efficient optimization of expensive black-box functions. However, the application to high-dimensional problems with several thousand observations remains challenging, and on difficult problems Bayesian optimization is often not competitive with other paradigms. In this paper we take the view that this is due to the implicit homogeneity of the global probabilistic models and an overemphasized exploration that results from global acquisition. This motivates the design of a local probabilistic approach for global optimization of large-scale high-dimensional problems. We propose the $\texttt{TuRBO}$ algorithm that fits a collection of local models and performs a principled global allocation of samples across these models via an implicit bandit approach. A comprehensive evaluation demonstrates that $\texttt{TuRBO}$ outperforms state-of-the-art methods from machine learning and operations research on problems spanning reinforcement learning, robotics, and the natural sciences.

Quantum computing (QC) has gained popularity due to its unique capabilities that are quite different from that of classical computers in terms of speed and methods of operations. This paper proposes hybrid models and methods that effectively leverage the complementary strengths of deterministic algorithms and QC techniques to overcome combinatorial complexity for solving large-scale mixed-integer programming problems. Four applicatio ns, namely the molecular conformation problem, job-shop scheduling problem, manufacturin g cell formation problem, and the vehicle routing problem, are specifically addressed. Large-scale instances of these application problems across multiple scales ranging from molecular design t o logistics optimization are computationally challenging for deterministic optimization algorithms on classical computers. To address the computational challenges, hybrid QC-based algorithms are proposed and extensive computational experimental results are presented to demonstrate their applicability and efficiency. The proposed QC-based solution strategies enjoy high computatio nal efficiency in terms of solution quality and computation time, by utilizing the unique features of both classical and quantum computers.