Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Joachim Groeger

dblp:206/7114 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

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 · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning
inverse reinforcement learning
0.512021
Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Explicit Policy Estimates · AAAI 2021
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning › inverse reinforcement learning
maximum entropy inverse reinforcement learning
0.512021
Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Explicit Policy Estimates · AAAI 2021
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
policy estimation
0.512021
Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Explicit Policy Estimates · AAAI 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

nested pseudo-likelihood · 0.5nested fixed point algorithm · 0.5conditional choice probability · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Explicit Policy Estimates
abstract
Various methods for solving the inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) problem have been developed independently in machine learning and economics. In particular, the method of Maximum Causal Entropy IRL is based on the perspective of entropy maximization, while related advances in the field of economics instead assume the existence of unobserved action shocks to explain expert behavior (Nested Fixed Point Algorithm, Conditional Choice Probability method, Nested Pseudo-Likelihood Algorithm). In this work, we make previously unknown connections between these related methods from both fields. We achieve this by showing that they all belong to a class of optimization problems, characterized by a common form of the objective, the associated policy and the objective gradient. We demonstrate key computational and algorithmic differences which arise between the methods due to an approximation of the optimal soft value function, and describe how this leads to more efficient algorithms. Using insights which emerge from our study of this class of optimization problems, we identify various problem scenarios and investigate each method's suitability for these problems.
Navyata Sanghvi, Shinnosuke Usami, Mohit Sharma 0001, Joachim Groeger, Kris Makoto Kitani
AAAI4