3.8 Proceedings Paper

Flow-based Recurrent Belief State Learning for POMDPs

出版社

JMLR-JOURNAL MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China [2021AAA0150000]
  2. NSF China [U20A20334, 52072213]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) is a generic framework for modeling real world sequential decision making processes, where the main challenge lies in accurately obtaining the belief state. This paper proposes a Flow-based Recurrent Belief State model that incorporates normalizing flows to learn general continuous belief states for POMDPs, and demonstrates its effectiveness in improving performance.
Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) provides a principled and generic framework to model real world sequential decision making processes but yet remains unsolved, especially for high dimensional continuous space and unknown models. The main challenge lies in how to accurately obtain the belief state, which is the probability distribution over the unobservable environment states given historical information. Accurately calculating this belief state is a precondition for obtaining an optimal policy of POMDPs. Recent advances in deep learning techniques show great potential to learn good belief states. However, existing methods can only learn approximated distribution with limited flexibility. In this paper, we introduce the FlOw-based Recurrent BElief State model (FORBES), which incorporates normalizing flows into the variational inference to learn general continuous belief states for POMDPs. Furthermore, we show that the learned belief states can be plugged into downstream RL algorithms to improve performance. In experiments, we show that our methods successfully capture the complex belief states that enable multi-modal predictions as well as high quality reconstructions, and results on challenging visual-motor control tasks show that our method achieves superior performance and sample efficiency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据