Safety Optimized Reinforcement Learning via Multi-Objective Policy Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safe reinforcement learning (Safe RL) refers to a class of techniques that aim to prevent RL algorithms from violating constraints in the process of decision-making and exploration during trial and error. In this paper, a novel model-free Safe RL algorithm, formulated based on the multi-objective policy optimization framework is introduced where the policy is optimized towards optimality and safety, simultaneously. The optimality is achieved by the environment reward function that is subsequently shaped using a safety critic. The advantage of the Safety Optimized RL (SORL) algorithm compared to the traditional Safe RL algorithms is that it omits the need to constrain the policy search space. This allows SORL to find a natural tradeoff between safety and optimality without compromising the performance in terms of either safety or optimality due to strict search space constraints. Through our theoretical analysis of SORL, we propose a condition for SORL’s converged policy to guarantee safety and then use it to introduce an aggressiveness parameter that allows for fine-tuning the mentioned tradeoff. The experimental results obtained in seven different robotic environments indicate a considerable reduction in the number of safety violations along with higher, or competitive, policy returns, in comparison to six different state-of-the-art Safe RL methods. The results demonstrate the significant superiority of the proposed SORL algorithm in safety-critical applications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".