In today's reinforcement learning systems, a simple reward function is often hand-crafted, and still

Dynamic in air handover is a fundamental challenge for dual-arm robots, requiring accurate perception, precise coordination, and natural motion. Prior methods often rely on dynamics models, strong priors, or depth sensing, limiting generalization and naturalness. We present DyDexHandover, a novel framework that employs multi-agent reinforcement learning to train an end to end RGB based policy for bimanual object throwing and catching. To achieve more human-like behavior, the throwing policy is guided by a human policy regularization scheme, encouraging fluid and natural motion, and enhancing the generalization capability of the policy. A dual arm simulation environment was built in Isaac Sim for experimental evaluation. DyDexHandover achieves nearly 99 percent success on training objects and 75 percent on unseen objects, while generating human-like throwing and catching behaviors. To our knowledge, it is the first method to realize dual-arm in-air handover using only raw RGB perception.

Preference-based Reinforcement Learning (PbRL) is an active area of research, and has made significant strides in single-agent actor and in observer human-in-the-loop scenarios. However, its application within the co-operative multi-agent RL frameworks, where humans actively participate and express preferences for agent behavior, remains largely uncharted. We consider a two-agent (Human-AI) cooperative setup where both the agents are rewarded according to human's reward function for the team. However, the agent does not have access to it, and instead, utilizes preference-based queries to elicit its objectives and human's preferences for the robot in the human-robot team. We introduce the notion of Human-Flexibility, i.e. whether the human partner is amenable to multiple team strategies, with a special case being Specified Orchestration where the human has a single team policy in mind (most constrained case). We propose a suite of domains to study PbRL for Human-AI cooperative setup which explicitly require forced cooperation. Adapting state-of-the-art single-agent PbRL algorithms to our two-agent setting, we conduct a comprehensive benchmarking study across our domain suite. Our findings highlight the challenges associated with high degree of Human-Flexibility and the limited access to the human's envisioned policy in PbRL for Human-AI cooperation. Notably, we observe that PbRL algorithms exhibit effective performance exclusively in the case of Specified Orchestration which can be seen as an upper bound PbRL performance for future research.

Inferring reward functions from human behavior is at the center of value alignment - aligning AI objectives with what we, humans, actually want. But doing so relies on models of how humans behave given their objectives. After decades of research in cognitive science, neuroscience, and behavioral economics, obtaining accurate human models remains an open research topic. This begs the question: how accurate do these models need to be in order for the reward inference to be accurate? On the one hand, if small errors in the model can lead to catastrophic error in inference, the entire framework of reward learning seems ill-fated, as we will never have perfect models of human behavior. On the other hand, if as our models improve, we can have a guarantee that reward accuracy also improves, this would show the benefit of more work on the modeling side. We study this question both theoretically and empirically. We do show that it is unfortunately possible to construct small adversarial biases in behavior that lead to arbitrarily large errors in the inferred reward. However, and arguably more importantly, we are also able to identify reasonable assumptions under which the reward inference error can be bounded linearly in the error in the human model. Finally, we verify our theoretical insights in discrete and continuous control tasks with simulated and human data.

Our ultimate goal is to build robust policies for robots that assist people. What makes this hard is that people can behave unexpectedly at test time, potentially interacting with the robot outside its training distribution and leading to failures. Even just measuring robustness is a challenge. Adversarial perturbations are the default, but they can paint the wrong picture: they can correspond to human motions that are unlikely to occur during natural interactions with people. A robot policy might fail under small adversarial perturbations but work under large natural perturbations. We propose that capturing robustness in these interactive settings requires constructing and analyzing the entire natural-adversarial frontier: the Pareto-frontier of human policies that are the best trade-offs between naturalness and low robot performance. We introduce RIGID, a method for constructing this frontier by training adversarial human policies that trade off between minimizing robot reward and acting human-like (as measured by a discriminator). On an Assistive Gym task, we use RIGID to analyze the performance of standard collaborative Reinforcement Learning, as well as the performance of existing methods meant to increase robustness. We also compare the frontier RIGID identifies with the failures identified in expert adversarial interaction, and with naturally-occurring failures during user interaction. Overall, we find evidence that RIGID can provide a meaningful measure of robustness predictive of deployment performance, and uncover failure cases in human-robot interaction that are difficult to find manually. https://ood-human.github.io.

Existing approaches to algorithmic fairness aim to ensure equitable outcomes if human decision-makers comply perfectly with algorithmic decisions. However, perfect compliance with the algorithm is rarely a reality or even a desirable outcome in human-AI collaboration. Yet, recent studies have shown that selective compliance with fair algorithms can amplify discrimination relative to the prior human policy. As a consequence, ensuring equitable outcomes requires fundamentally different algorithmic design principles that ensure robustness to the decision-maker's (a priori unknown) compliance pattern. We define the notion of compliance-robustly fair algorithmic recommendations that are guaranteed to (weakly) improve fairness in decisions, regardless of the human's compliance pattern. We propose a simple optimization strategy to identify the best performance-improving compliance-robustly fair policy. However, we show that it may be infeasible to design algorithmic recommendations that are simultaneously fair in isolation, compliance-robustly fair, and more accurate than the human policy; thus, if our goal is to improve the equity and accuracy of human-AI collaboration, it may not be desirable to enforce traditional fairness constraints.

In human-robot collaboration, the objectives of the human are often unknown to the robot. Moreover, even assuming a known objective, the human behavior is also uncertain. In order to plan a robust robot behavior, a key preliminary question is then: How to derive realistic human behaviors given a known objective? A major issue is that such a human behavior should itself account for the robot behavior, otherwise collaboration cannot happen. In this paper, we rely on Markov decision models, representing the uncertainty over the human objective as a probability distribution over a finite set of objective functions (inducing a distribution over human behaviors). Based on this, we propose two contributions: 1) an approach to automatically generate an uncertain human behavior (a policy) for each given objective function while accounting for possible robot behaviors; and 2) a robot planning algorithm that is robust to the above-mentioned uncertainties and relies on solving a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) obtained by reasoning on a distribution over human behaviors. A co-working scenario allows conducting experiments and presenting qualitative and quantitative results to evaluate our approach.

Recent work in sim2real has successfully enabled robots to act in physical environments by training in simulation with a diverse ''population'' of environments (i.e. domain randomization). In this work, we focus on enabling generalization in assistive tasks: tasks in which the robot is acting to assist a user (e.g. helping someone with motor impairments with bathing or with scratching an itch). Such tasks are particularly interesting relative to prior sim2real successes because the environment now contains a human who is also acting. This complicates the problem because the diversity of human users (instead of merely physical environment parameters) is more difficult to capture in a population, thus increasing the likelihood of encountering out-of-distribution (OOD) human policies at test time. We advocate that generalization to such OOD policies benefits from (1) learning a good latent representation for human policies that test-time humans can accurately be mapped to, and (2) making that representation adaptable with test-time interaction data, instead of relying on it to perfectly capture the space of human policies based on the simulated population only. We study how to best learn such a representation by evaluating on purposefully constructed OOD test policies. We find that sim2real methods that encode environment (or population) parameters and work well in tasks that robots do in isolation, do not work well in assistance. In assistance, it seems crucial to train the representation based on the history of interaction directly, because that is what the robot will have access to at test time. Further, training these representations to then predict human actions not only gives them better structure, but also enables them to be fine-tuned at test-time, when the robot observes the partner act. https://adaptive-caregiver.github.io.

Teamwork is a set of interrelated reasoning, actions and behaviors of team members that facilitate common objectives. Teamwork theory and experiments have resulted in a set of states and processes for team effectiveness in both human-human and agent-agent teams. However, human-agent teaming is less well studied because it is so new and involves asymmetry in policy and intent not present in human teams. To optimize team performance in human-agent teaming, it is critical that agents infer human intent and adapt their polices for smooth coordination. Most literature in human-agent teaming builds agents referencing a learned human model. Though these agents are guaranteed to perform well with the learned model, they lay heavy assumptions on human policy such as optimality and consistency, which is unlikely in many real-world scenarios. In this paper, we propose a novel adaptive agent architecture in human-model-free setting on a two-player cooperative game, namely Team Space Fortress (TSF). Previous human-human team research have shown complementary policies in TSF game and diversity in human players' skill, which encourages us to relax the assumptions on human policy. Therefore, we discard learning human models from human data, and instead use an adaptation strategy on a pre-trained library of exemplar policies composed of RL algorithms or rule-based methods with minimal assumptions of human behavior. The adaptation strategy relies on a novel similarity metric to infer human policy and then selects the most complementary policy in our library to maximize the team performance. The adaptive agent architecture can be deployed in real-time and generalize to any off-the-shelf static agents. We conducted human-agent experiments to evaluate the proposed adaptive agent framework, and demonstrated the suboptimality, diversity, and adaptability of human policies in human-agent teams.

Reinforcement learning algorithms have been mostly developed and evaluated under the assumption that they will operate in a fully autonomous manner---they will take all actions. However, in safety critical applications, full autonomy faces a variety of technical, societal and legal challenges, which have precluded the use of reinforcement learning policies in real-world systems. In this work, our goal is to develop algorithms that, by learning to switch control between machines and humans, allow existing reinforcement learning policies to operate under different automation levels. More specifically, we first formally define the learning to switch problem using finite horizon Markov decision processes. Then, we show that, if the human policy is known, we can find the optimal switching policy directly by solving a set of recursive equations using backwards induction. However, in practice, the human policy is often unknown. To overcome this, we develop an algorithm that uses upper confidence bounds on the human policy to find a sequence of switching policies whose total regret with respect to the optimal switching policy is sublinear. Simulation experiments on two important tasks in autonomous driving---lane keeping and obstacle avoidance---demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms and illustrate our theoretical findings.