Learning Goal Conditioned Socially Compliant Navigation From Demonstration Using Risk-Based Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the main challenges of operating mobile robots in social environments is the safe and fluid navigation therein, specifically the ability to share a space with other human inhabitants by complying with the explicit and implicit rules that we humans follow during navigation. While these rules come naturally to us, they resist simple and explicit definitions. In this letter, we present a learning-based solution to address the question of socially compliant navigation, which is to navigate while maintaining adherence to the navigational policies a person might use. We infer these policies by learning from human examples using inverse reinforcement learning techniques. In particular, this letter contributes an efficient sampling-based approximation to enable model-free deep inverse reinforcement learning, and a goal conditioned risk-based feature representation that adequately captures local information surrounding the agent. We validate our approach by comparing against a classical algorithm and a reinforcement learning agent and evaluate our feature representation against similar feature representations from the literature. We find that the combination of our proposed method and our feature representation produce higher quality trajectories and that our proposed feature representation plays a critical role in successful navigation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".