A long term goal of Interactive Reinforcement Learning is to incorporate non-expert human feedback to solve complex tasks. State-of-the-art methods have approached this problem by mapping human information to reward and value signals to indicate preferences and then iterating over them to compute the necessary control policy. In this paper we argue for an alternate, more effective characterization of human feedback: Policy Shaping. We introduce Advise, a Bayesian approach that attempts to maximize the information gained from human feedback by utilizing it as direct labels on the policy. We compare Advise to state-of-the-art approaches and highlight scenarios where it outperforms them and importantly is robust to infrequent and inconsistent human feedback.

Layout generation plays a crucial role in enhancing both user experience and design efficiency. However, current approaches suffer from task-specific generation capabilities and perceptually misaligned evaluation metrics, leading to limited applicability and ineffective measurement. In this paper, we propose \textit{Uni-Layout}, a novel framework that achieves unified generation, human-mimicking evaluation and alignment between the two. For universal generation, we incorporate various layout tasks into a single taxonomy and develop a unified generator that handles background or element contents constrained tasks via natural language prompts. To introduce human feedback for the effective evaluation of layouts, we build \textit{Layout-HF100k}, the first large-scale human feedback dataset with 100,000 expertly annotated layouts. Based on \textit{Layout-HF100k}, we introduce a human-mimicking evaluator that integrates visual and geometric information, employing a Chain-of-Thought mechanism to conduct qualitative assessments alongside a confidence estimation module to yield quantitative measurements. For better alignment between the generator and the evaluator, we integrate them into a cohesive system by adopting Dynamic-Margin Preference Optimization (DMPO), which dynamically adjusts margins based on preference strength to better align with human judgments. Extensive experiments show that \textit{Uni-Layout} significantly outperforms both task-specific and general-purpose methods. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/JD-GenX/Uni-Layout.

Prompt optimization aims to find the best prompt to a large language model (LLM) for a given task. LLMs have been successfully used to help find and improve prompt candidates for single-step tasks. However, realistic tasks for agents are multi-step and introduce new challenges: (1) Prompt content is likely to be more extensive and complex, making it more difficult for LLMs to analyze errors, (2) the impact of an individual step is difficult to evaluate, and (3) different people may have varied preferences about task execution. While humans struggle to optimize prompts, they are good at providing feedback about LLM outputs; we therefore introduce a new LLM-driven discrete prompt optimization framework that incorporates human-designed feedback rules about potential errors to automatically offer direct suggestions for improvement. Our framework is stylized as a genetic algorithm in which an LLM generates new candidate prompts from a parent prompt and its associated feedback; we use a learned heuristic function that predicts prompt performance to efficiently sample from these candidates. This approach significantly outperforms both human-engineered prompts and several other prompt optimization methods across eight representative multi-step tasks (an average 27.7% and 28.2% improvement to current best methods on GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, respectively). We further show that the score function for tasks can be modified to better align with individual preferences. We believe our work can serve as a benchmark for automatic prompt optimization for LLM-driven multi-step tasks. Datasets and Codes are available at https://github.com/yongchao98/PROMST. Project Page is available at https://yongchao98.github.io/MIT-REALM-PROMST.

A long term goal of Interactive Reinforcement Learning is to incorporate non-expert human feedback to solve complex tasks. State-of-the-art methods have approached this problem by mapping human information to reward and value signals to indicate preferences and then iterating over them to compute the necessary control policy. In this paper we argue for an alternate, more effective characterization of human feedback: Policy Shaping. We introduce Advise, a Bayesian approach that attempts to maximize the information gained from human feedback by utilizing it as direct labels on the policy. We compare Advise to state-of-the-art approaches and highlight scenarios where it outperforms them and importantly is robust to infrequent and inconsistent human feedback.

A long term goal of Interactive Reinforcement Learning is to incorporate non-expert human feedback to solve complex tasks. State-of-the-art methods have approached this problem by mapping human information to reward and value signals to indicate preferences and then iterating over them to compute the necessary control policy. In this paper we argue for an alternate, more effective characterization of human feedback: Policy Shaping. We introduce Advise, a Bayesian approach that attempts to maximize the information gained from human feedback by utilizing it as direct labels on the policy. We compare Advise to state-of-the-art approaches and highlight scenarios where it outperforms them and importantly is robust to infrequent and inconsistent human feedback.