analiza aiqbench
This research introduces Disagreement-Regularized Imitation Learning (DRIL), a method that leverages policy disagreement as a reinforcement learning reward to mitigate error accumulation in behavior cloning. Experimental results on image-based continuous control demonstrate significant performance gains, particularly in low-data regimes where few demonstrations are available. The study highlights the trade-offs between different learner representations and checkpoint selection strategies for improving robustness outside the training distribution.
Disagreement-Regularized Imitation Learning for Image-Based Continuous Control with Gaussian and Beta Policies
arXiv:2609.38407v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Purpose: Behavior cloning can accumulate errors when a learned controller visits states outside the demonstrated distribution. This study evaluates whether Disagreement-Regularized Imitation Learning (DRIL), which converts disagreement among cloned policies into a reinforcement-learning reward, improves image-based continuous control. Methods: A controlled CarRacing study combines Gaussian and Beta learner policies, demonstrations from either a clipped Gaussian expert or an intrinsically bounded Beta expert, one or 20 trajectories, deterministic and stochastic evaluation, and three retained stages: behavior cloning, the highest 10-episode training-score checkpoint, and the final DRIL checkpoint. The disagreement ensemble contains five Gaussian policies in every variant. Each retained policy is evaluated over 100 procedurally generated episodes. Results: Score-selected DRIL produced its largest gains in the few-demonstration setting, improving over the strongest behavior-cloning mean by 61% with clipped-action demonstrations and by 112% with bounded-action demonstrations. With 20 trajectories, the advantage of DRIL narrowed; in the bounded-action regime, Beta behavior cloning remained about 7% above the best DRIL checkpoint. The experiments also show that the informativeness of the disagreement reward changes with the learner representation and training stage. Conclusion: DRIL can substantially improve few-demonstration visual continuous control, while bounded Beta policies provide strong behavior-cloning performance when more demonstrations are available. The results highlight the joint importance of learner support,ensemble response, and checkpoint selection.
Abstract:Purpose: Behavior cloning can accumulate errors when a learned controller visits states outside the demonstrated distribution. This study evaluates whether Disagreement-Regularized Imitation Learning (DRIL), which converts disagreement among cloned policies into a reinforcement-learning reward, improves image-based continuous control. Methods: A controlled CarRacing study combines Gaussian and Beta learner policies, demonstrations from either a clipped Gaussian expert or an intrinsically bounded Beta expert, one or 20 trajectories, deterministic and stochastic evaluation, and three retained stages: behavior cloning, the highest 10-episode training-score checkpoint, and the final DRIL checkpoint. The disagreement ensemble contains five Gaussian policies in every variant. Each retained policy is evaluated over 100 procedurally generated episodes. Results: Score-selected DRIL produced its largest gains in the few-demonstration setting, improving over the strongest behavior-cloning mean by 61% with clipped-action demonstrations and by 112% with bounded-action demonstrations. With 20 trajectories, the advantage of DRIL narrowed; in the bounded-action regime, Beta behavior cloning remained about 7% above the best DRIL checkpoint. The experiments also show that the informativeness of the disagreement reward changes with the learner representation and training stage. Conclusion: DRIL can substantially improve few-demonstration visual continuous control, while bounded Beta policies provide strong behavior-cloning performance when more demonstrations are available. The results highlight the joint importance of learner support,ensemble response, and checkpoint selection.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.38407 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.38407v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.38407 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 305 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
What's Continual Learning, and Why Might We Expect To See It In Advanced LLM Agents?
LessWrong · 12 iun. 2026

Runway’s WorldPrompt and the Engineering of Real-Time Worlds
Latent Space · 25 sept. 2026

The Entangled Dimensions of Decision Theory
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026
For Love of the Lightcone, Don't Partisanize AI Safety
LessWrong · 17 sept. 2026