MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behaviour Learning with Adaptive Motif Discovery and Interacting Multiple Model

2022· article· en· W4313001420 on OpenAlexaff
Hanging Zhao, Travis Manderson, Hao Zhang, Xue Liu, Gregory Dudek

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityMotif (music)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceEstimatorMachine learningEntropy (arrow of time)GaussianMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose an approach that enables simultaneous interpretable learning of a high-level discrete behaviour and its low-level rhythmic sub-behaviour. We do this though a unified reward function, where a reward function that only describes low-level behaviour, with less impact on learning of other behaviours is recovered from few-shot motion demonstrations. To this end, we first extract local behaviour motifs from state-only human demonstrations and random driving samples using an adaptive motif discovery approach derived from the Matrix Profile algorithm. We then optimize parameters for motif discovery by maximizing the sum and entropy over motif sizes. Interacting Multiple Model (IMM) estimators are constructed on top of linear-Gaussian dynamics of discovered motifs, the cumulative distributions over motifs estimated by IMMs serve as the basis of the reward function. By combining the recovered reward with the terrain type signal gathered from the environment, we are able to train a dual-objective off-road vehicle controller that demonstrates both terrain selection and human-like driving behaviours. Compared with related approaches across 10 people, our rhythmic behaviour reward recovery approach enables the controller to produce higher preference over human driving demonstrations. In addition to performing more stable across different people with 87% less variance than the best baseline in rhythmic behaviour indicator, our method reduces the negative effects on higher-level behaviour learning while maintaining high interpretability at all stages of the algorithm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)Same topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207