empowerment
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Agents (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Reinforcement Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Robots (0.69)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Manitoba (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Reinforcement Learning (0.98)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty (0.68)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.46)
30de9ece7cf3790c8c39ccff1a044209-Paper.pdf
One difficulty in using artificial agents for human-assistive applications lies in the challenge of accurately assisting with a person's goal(s). Existing methods tend to rely on inferring the human's goal, which is challenging when there are many potential goals or when the set of candidate goals is difficult to identify. We propose a new paradigm for assistance by instead increasing thehuman's ability tocontroltheir environment, and formalize this approach byaugmenting reinforcement learning withhuman empowerment.
- North America > United States > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago (0.04)
- North America > Canada > British Columbia > Metro Vancouver Regional District > Vancouver (0.04)
Learning to Assist Humans without Inferring Rewards
Assistive agents should make humans' lives easier. Classically, such assistance is studied through the lens of inverse reinforcement learning, where an assistive agent (e.g., a chatbot, a robot) infers a human's intention and then selects actions to help the human reach that goal. This approach requires inferring intentions, which can be difficult in high-dimensional settings. We build upon prior work that studies assistance through the lens of empowerment: an assistive agent aims to maximize the influence of the human's actions such that they exert a greater control over the environmental outcomes and can solve tasks in fewer steps. We lift the major limitation of prior work in this area--scalability to high-dimensional settings--with contrastive successor representations. We formally prove that these representations estimate a similar notion of empowerment to that studied by prior work and provide a ready-made mechanism for optimizing it. Empirically, our proposed method outperforms prior methods on synthetic benchmarks, and scales to Overcooked, a cooperative game setting. Theoretically, our work connects ideas from information theory, neuroscience, and reinforcement learning, and charts a path for representations to play a critical role in solving assistive problems.
AvE: Assistance via Empowerment
One difficulty in using artificial agents for human-assistive applications lies in the challenge of accurately assisting with a person's goal(s). Existing methods tend to rely on inferring the human's goal, which is challenging when there are many potential goals or when the set of candidate goals is difficult to identify. We propose a new paradigm for assistance by instead increasing the human's ability to control their environment, and formalize this approach by augmenting reinforcement learning with human empowerment. This task-agnostic objective increases the person's autonomy and ability to achieve any eventual state. We test our approach against assistance based on goal inference, highlighting scenarios where our method overcomes failure modes stemming from goal ambiguity or misspecification. As existing methods for estimating empowerment in continuous domains are computationally hard, precluding its use in real time learned assistance, we also propose an efficient empowerment-inspired proxy metric. Using this, we are able to successfully demonstrate our method in a shared autonomy user study for a challenging simulated teleoperation task with human-in-the-loop training.
Empowerment Gain and Causal Model Construction: Children and adults are sensitive to controllability and variability in their causal interventions
Yiu, Eunice, Allen, Kelsey, Ginosar, Shiry, Gopnik, Alison
Learning about the causal structure of the world is a fundamental problem for human cognition. Causal models and especially causal learning have proved to be difficult for large pretrained models using standard techniques of deep learning. In contrast, cognitive scientists have applied advances in our formal understanding of causation in computer science, particularly within the Causal Bayes Net formalism, to understand human causal learning. In the very different tradition of reinforcement learning, researchers have described an intrinsic reward signal called "empowerment" which maximizes mutual information between actions and their outcomes. "Empowerment" may be an important bridge between classical Bayesian causal learning and reinforcement learning and may help to characterize causal learning in humans and enable it in machines. If an agent learns an accurate causal world model, they will necessarily increase their empowerment, and increasing empowerment will lead to a more accurate causal world model. Empowerment may also explain distinctive features of childrens causal learning, as well as providing a more tractable computational account of how that learning is possible. In an empirical study, we systematically test how children and adults use cues to empowerment to infer causal relations, and design effective causal interventions.
- Research Report > Experimental Study (0.93)
- Research Report > New Finding (0.67)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning > Uncertainty > Bayesian Inference (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks > Bayesian Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Cognitive Science (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks (0.87)
The Empowerment of Science of Science by Large Language Models: New Tools and Methods
Liang, Guoqiang, Gong, Jingqian, Li, Mengxuan, Lin, Gege, Zhang, Shuo
Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited exceptional capabilities in natural language understanding and generation, image recognition, and multimodal tasks, charting a course towards AGI and emerging as a central issue in the global technological race. This manuscript conducts a comprehensive review of the core technologies that support LLMs from a user standpoint, including prompt engineering, knowledge-enhanced retrieval augmented generation, fine tuning, pretraining, and tool learning. Additionally, it traces the historical development of Science of Science (SciSci) and presents a forward looking perspective on the potential applications of LLMs within the scientometric domain. Furthermore, it discusses the prospect of an AI agent based model for scientific evaluation, and presents new research fronts detection and knowledge graph building methods with LLMs.
When Empowerment Disempowers
Yang, Claire, Cakmak, Maya, Kleiman-Weiner, Max
Empowerment, a measure of an agent's ability to control its environment, has been proposed as a universal goal-agnostic objective for motivating assistive behavior in AI agents. While multi-human settings like homes and hospitals are promising for AI assistance, prior work on empowerment-based assistance assumes that the agent assists one human in isolation. We introduce an open source multi-human gridworld test suite Disempower-Grid. Using Disempower-Grid, we empirically show that assistive RL agents optimizing for one human's empowerment can significantly reduce another human's environmental influence and rewards - a phenomenon we formalize as disempowerment. We characterize when disempowerment occurs in these environments and show that joint empowerment mitigates disempowerment at the cost of the user's reward. Our work reveals a broader challenge for the AI alignment community: goal-agnostic objectives that seem aligned in single-agent settings can become misaligned in multi-agent contexts.
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > Colorado > Boulder County > Boulder (0.04)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Kantō > Ibaraki Prefecture > Tsukuba (0.04)
- Research Report > New Finding (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (0.93)
Plasticity as the Mirror of Empowerment
Abel, David, Bowling, Michael, Barreto, André, Dabney, Will, Dong, Shi, Hansen, Steven, Harutyunyan, Anna, Khetarpal, Khimya, Lyle, Clare, Pascanu, Razvan, Piliouras, Georgios, Precup, Doina, Richens, Jonathan, Rowland, Mark, Schaul, Tom, Singh, Satinder
Agents are minimally entities that are influenced by their past observations and act to influence future observations. This latter capacity is captured by empowerment, which has served as a vital framing concept across artificial intelligence and cognitive science. This former capacity, however, is equally foundational: In what ways, and to what extent, can an agent be influenced by what it observes? In this paper, we ground this concept in a universal agent-centric measure that we refer to as plasticity, and reveal a fundamental connection to empowerment. Following a set of desiderata on a suitable definition, we define plasticity using a new information-theoretic quantity we call the generalized directed information. We show that this new quantity strictly generalizes the directed information introduced by Massey (1990) while preserving all of its desirable properties. Under this definition, we find that plasticity is well thought of as the mirror of empowerment: The two concepts are defined using the same measure, with only the direction of influence reversed. Our main result establishes a tension between the plasticity and empowerment of an agent, suggesting that agent design needs to be mindful of both characteristics. We explore the implications of these findings, and suggest that plasticity, empowerment, and their relationship are essential to understanding agency
- North America > United States (0.28)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England (0.28)
Training LLM Agents to Empower Humans
Ellis, Evan, Myers, Vivek, Tuyls, Jens, Levine, Sergey, Dragan, Anca, Eysenbach, Benjamin
Assistive agents should not only take actions on behalf of a human, but also step out of the way and cede control when there are important decisions to be made. However, current methods for building assistive agents, whether via mimicking expert humans or via RL finetuning on an inferred reward, often encourage agents to complete tasks on their own rather than truly assisting the human attain their objectives. Additionally, these methods often require costly explicit human feedback to provide a training signal. We propose a new approach to tuning assistive language models based on maximizing the human's empowerment, their ability to effect desired changes in the environment. Our empowerment-maximizing method, Empower, only requires offline text data, providing a self-supervised method for fine-tuning language models to better assist humans. To study the efficacy of our approach, we conducted an 18-person user study comparing our empowerment assistant with a strong baseline. Participants preferred our assistant 78% of the time (p=0.015), with a 31% higher acceptance rate and 38% fewer suggestions. Additionally, we introduce a new environment for evaluating multi-turn code assistance using simulated humans. Using this environment, we show that agents trained with Empower increase the success rate of a simulated human programmer on challenging coding questions by an average of 192% over an SFT baseline. With this empowerment objective, we provide a framework for useful aligned AI agents at scale using only offline data without the need for any additional human feedback or verifiable rewards.
- Research Report > New Finding (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (1.00)
- Questionnaire & Opinion Survey (1.00)