Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Brian Wojcik
dblp:139/1368
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Reinforcement learning · 87% Motion planning and robot control · 13% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › preference learning
human preference learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Learning Trajectory Preferences for Manipulators via Iterative Improvement · NIPS 2013 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reinforcement learning from human feedback
preference-based reinforcement learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Learning Trajectory Preferences for Manipulators via Iterative Improvement · NIPS 2013 |
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
trajectory optimization |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | Learning Trajectory Preferences for Manipulators via Iterative Improvement · NIPS 2013 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
regret bounds · 0.2co-active online learning · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | Learning Trajectory Preferences for Manipulators via Iterative ImprovementabstractWe consider the problem of learning good trajectories for manipulation tasks. This is challenging because the criterion defining a good trajectory varies with users, tasks and environments. In this paper, we propose a co-active online learning framework for teaching robots the preferences of its users for object manipulation tasks. The key novelty of our approach lies in the type of feedback expected from the user: the human user does not need to demonstrate optimal trajectories as training data, but merely needs to iteratively provide trajectories that slightly improve over the trajectory currently proposed by the system. We argue that this co-active preference feedback can be more easily elicited from the user than demonstrations of optimal trajectories, which are often challenging and non-intuitive to provide on high degrees of freedom manipulators. Nevertheless, theoretical regret bounds of our algorithm match the asymptotic rates of optimal trajectory algorithms. We also formulate a score function to capture the contextual information and demonstrate the generalizability of our algorithm on a variety of household tasks, for whom, the preferences were not only influenced by the object being manipulated but also by the surrounding environment. Ashesh Jain, Brian Wojcik, Thorsten Joachims, Ashutosh Saxena |
NIPS | 2 |