To the Noise and Back: Diffusion for Shared Autonomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shared autonomy is an operational concept in which a user and an autonomous agent collaboratively control a robotic system.It provides a number of advantages over the extremes of full-teleoperation and full-autonomy in many settings.Traditional approaches to shared autonomy rely on knowledge of the environment dynamics, a discrete space of user goals that is known a priori, or knowledge of the user's policy-assumptions that are unrealistic in many domains.Recent works relax some of these assumptions by formulating shared autonomy with model-free deep reinforcement learning (RL).In particular, they no longer need knowledge of the goal space (e.g., that the goals are discrete or constrained) or environment dynamics.However, they need knowledge of a task-specific reward function to train the policy.Unfortunately, such reward specification can be a difficult and brittle process.On top of that, the formulations inherently rely on human-in-the-loop training, and that necessitates them to prepare a policy that mimics users' behavior.In this paper, we present a new approach to shared autonomy that employs a modulation of the forward and reverse diffusion process of diffusion models.Our approach does not assume known environment dynamics or the space of user goals, and in contrast to previous work, it does not require any reward feedback, nor does it require access to the user's policy during training.Instead, our framework learns a distribution over a space of desired behaviors.It then employs a diffusion model to translate the user's actions to a sample from this distribution.Crucially, we show that it is possible to carry out this process in a manner that preserves the user's control authority.We evaluate our framework on a series of challenging continuous control tasks, and analyze its ability to effectively correct user actions while maintaining their autonomy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".