Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Rati Devidze
dblp:234/8779
· DBLP profile ↗
11ranked-venue papers
3as first author
6since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 11 · 3 first-author · 6 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 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
9 papers |
Reinforcement learning · 67% Learning theory · 9% Robot manipulation · 6% | |
| Network and information security
2 papers |
Security and privacy of machine learning · 100% | |
| Theoretical computer science
2 papers |
Mathematical optimization · 82% Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 18% |
Topics — the 19 heaviest of 20, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning
inverse reinforcement learning |
1.3 | 3 | 2021 | Curriculum Design for Teaching via Demonstrations: Theory and Applications · NeurIPS 2021 Learner-aware Teaching: Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Preferences and Constraints · NeurIPS 2019 Interactive Teaching Algorithms for Inverse Reinforcement Learning · IJCAI 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › robust reinforcement learning
adversarial reinforcement learning |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | Policy Teaching in Reinforcement Learning via Environment Poisoning Attacks · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021 Policy Teaching via Environment Poisoning: Training-time Adversarial Attacks against Reinforcement Learning · ICML 2020 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › reward design
reward shaping |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Exploration-Guided Reward Shaping for Reinforcement Learning under Sparse Rewards · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
sparse reward |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | Exploration-Guided Reward Shaping for Reinforcement Learning under Sparse Rewards · NeurIPS 2022 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning › offline imitation learning
behavior cloning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Curriculum Design for Teaching via Demonstrations: Theory and Applications · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Learning paradigms › curriculum learning
curriculum design |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Curriculum Design for Teaching via Demonstrations: Theory and Applications · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
imitation learning |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Curriculum Design for Teaching via Demonstrations: Theory and Applications · NeurIPS 2021 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation
learning from demonstration |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Curriculum Design for Teaching via Demonstrations: Theory and Applications · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › human-in-the-loop reinforcement learning › interactive reinforcement learning
policy teaching |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Policy Teaching in Reinforcement Learning via Environment Poisoning Attacks · J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2021 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reward design |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Explicable Reward Design for Reinforcement Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2021 |
Mathematical optimization
discrete optimization |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Explicable Reward Design for Reinforcement Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2021 |
Machine learning › Learning theory › computational learning theory
machine teaching |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Understanding the Power and Limitations of Teaching with Imperfect Knowledge · IJCAI 2020 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
collaborative learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning to Collaborate in Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
convergence guarantees |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Interactive Teaching Algorithms for Inverse Reinforcement Learning · IJCAI 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
multi-agent reinforcement learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning to Collaborate in Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2019 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
online learning |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning to Collaborate in Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2019 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › nonmonotonic reasoning › preference handling
preference modeling |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learner-aware Teaching: Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Preferences and Constraints · NeurIPS 2019 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
regret minimization |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Learning to Collaborate in Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2019 |
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
smooth games |
0.1 | 1 | 2019 | Learning to Collaborate in Markov Decision Processes · ICML 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
optimization · 1.9potential-based reward shaping · 1.0markov decision process · 1.0maximum causal entropy IRL · 0.9regret minimization · 0.9online learning · 0.8intrinsic reward · 0.6exploration bonus · 0.6difficulty scores · 0.5cross-entropy behavioral cloning · 0.5regret analysis · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Ethics in Action: Training Reinforcement Learning Agents for Moral Decision-making In Text-based Adventure GamesabstractReinforcement Learning (RL) has demonstrated its potential in solving goal-oriented sequential tasks. However, with the increasing capabilities of RL agents, ensuring morally responsible agent behavior is becoming a pressing concern. Previous approaches have included moral considerations by statically assigning a moral score to each action at runtime. However, these methods do not account for the potential moral value of future states when evaluating immoral actions. This limits the ability to find trade-offs between different aspects of moral behavior and the utility of the action. In this paper, we aim to factor in moral scores by adding a constraint to the RL objective that is incorporated during training, thereby dynamically adapting the policy function. By combining Lagrangian optimization and meta-gradient learning, we develop an RL method that is able to find a trade-off between immoral behavior and performance in the decision-making process. Rati Devidze, Waleed Mustafa, Sophie Fellenz |
AISTATS | 2 |
| 2023 | Learning to Play Text-Based Adventure Games with Maximum Entropy Reinforcement Learning
Rati Devidze, Sophie Fellenz |
ECML/PKDD (4) | 2 |
| 2022 | Exploration-Guided Reward Shaping for Reinforcement Learning under Sparse RewardsabstractWe study the problem of reward shaping to accelerate the training process of a reinforcement learning agent. Existing works have considered a number of different reward shaping formulations; however, they either require external domain knowledge or fail in environments with extremely sparse rewards. In this paper, we propose a novel framework, Exploration-Guided Reward Shaping (ExploRS), that operates in a fully self-supervised manner and can accelerate an agent's learning even in sparse-reward environments. The key idea of ExploRS is to learn an intrinsic reward function in combination with exploration-based bonuses to maximize the agent's utility w.r.t. extrinsic rewards. We theoretically showcase the usefulness of our reward shaping framework in a special family of MDPs. Experimental results on several environments with sparse/noisy reward signals demonstrate the effectiveness of ExploRS. Rati Devidze, Parameswaran Kamalaruban, Adish Singla |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2021 | Explicable Reward Design for Reinforcement Learning AgentsabstractWe study the design of explicable reward functions for a reinforcement learning agent while guaranteeing that an optimal policy induced by the function belongs to a set of target policies. By being explicable, we seek to capture two properties: (a) informativeness so that the rewards speed up the agent's convergence, and (b) sparseness as a proxy for ease of interpretability of the rewards. The key challenge is that higher informativeness typically requires dense rewards for many learning tasks, and existing techniques do not allow one to balance these two properties appropriately. In this paper, we investigate the problem from the perspective of discrete optimization and introduce a novel framework, ExpRD, to design explicable reward functions. ExpRD builds upon an informativeness criterion that captures the (sub-)optimality of target policies at different time horizons in terms of actions taken from any given starting state. We provide a mathematical analysis of ExpRD, and show its connections to existing reward design techniques, including potential-based reward shaping. Experimental results on two navigation tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of ExpRD in designing explicable reward functions. Rati Devidze, Goran Radanovic, Parameswaran Kamalaruban, Adish Singla |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2021 | Curriculum Design for Teaching via Demonstrations: Theory and ApplicationsabstractWe consider the problem of teaching via demonstrations in sequential decision-making settings. In particular, we study how to design a personalized curriculum over demonstrations to speed up the learner's convergence. We provide a unified curriculum strategy for two popular learner models: Maximum Causal Entropy Inverse Reinforcement Learning (MaxEnt-IRL) and Cross-Entropy Behavioral Cloning (CrossEnt-BC). Our unified strategy induces a ranking over demonstrations based on a notion of difficulty scores computed w.r.t. the teacher's optimal policy and the learner's current policy. Compared to the state of the art, our strategy doesn't require access to the learner's internal dynamics and still enjoys similar convergence guarantees under mild technical conditions. Furthermore, we adapt our curriculum strategy to the setting where no teacher agent is present using task-specific difficulty scores. Experiments on a synthetic car driving environment and navigation-based environments demonstrate the effectiveness of our curriculum strategy. Gaurav Yengera, Rati Devidze, Parameswaran Kamalaruban, Adish Singla |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2021 | Policy Teaching in Reinforcement Learning via Environment Poisoning AttacksabstractWe study a security threat to reinforcement learning where an attacker poisons the learning environment to force the agent into executing a target policy chosen by the attacker. As a victim, we consider RL agents whose objective is to find a policy that maximizes reward in infinite-horizon problem settings. The attacker can manipulate the rewards and the transition dynamics in the learning environment at training-time, and is interested in doing so in a stealthy manner. We propose an optimization framework for finding an optimal stealthy attack for different measures of attack cost. We provide lower/upper bounds on the attack cost, and instantiate our attacks in two settings: (i) an offline setting where the agent is doing planning in the poisoned environment, and (ii) an online setting where the agent is learning a policy with poisoned feedback. Our results show that the attacker can easily succeed in teaching any target policy to the victim under mild conditions and highlight a significant security threat to reinforcement learning agents in practice. Amin Rakhsha, Goran Radanovic, Rati Devidze, Xiaojin Zhu 0001, Adish Singla |
J. Mach. Learn. Res. | 3 |
| 2020 | Policy Teaching via Environment Poisoning: Training-time Adversarial Attacks against Reinforcement LearningabstractWe study a security threat to reinforcement learning where an attacker poisons the learning environment to force the agent into executing a target policy chosen by the attacker. As a victim, we consider RL agents whose objective is to find a policy that maximizes average reward in undiscounted infinite-horizon problem settings. The attacker can manipulate the rewards or the transition dynamics in the learning environment at training-time and is interested in doing so in a stealthy manner. We propose an optimization framework for finding an \emph{optimal stealthy attack} for different measures of attack cost. We provide sufficient technical conditions under which the attack is feasible and provide lower/upper bounds on the attack cost. We instantiate our attacks in two settings: (i) an \emph{offline} setting where the agent is doing planning in the poisoned environment, and (ii) an \emph{online} setting where the agent is learning a policy using a regret-minimization framework with poisoned feedback. Our results show that the attacker can easily succeed in teaching any target policy to the victim under mild conditions and highlight a significant security threat to reinforcement learning agents in practice. Amin Rakhsha, Goran Radanovic, Rati Devidze, Xiaojin Zhu 0001, Adish Singla |
ICML | 3 |
| 2020 | Understanding the Power and Limitations of Teaching with Imperfect KnowledgeabstractMachine teaching studies the interaction between a teacher and a student/learner where the teacher selects training examples for the learner to learn a specific task. The typical assumption is that the teacher has perfect knowledge of the task---this knowledge comprises knowing the desired learning target, having the exact task representation used by the learner, and knowing the parameters capturing the learning dynamics of the learner. Inspired by real-world applications of machine teaching in education, we consider the setting where teacher's knowledge is limited and noisy, and the key research question we study is the following: When does a teacher succeed or fail in effectively teaching a learner using its imperfect knowledge? We answer this question by showing connections to how imperfect knowledge affects the teacher's solution of the corresponding machine teaching problem when constructing optimal teaching sets. Our results have important implications for designing robust teaching algorithms for real-world applications. Rati Devidze, Farnam Mansouri, Luis Haug, Yuxin Chen 0001, Adish Singla |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2019 | Learning to Collaborate in Markov Decision ProcessesabstractWe consider a two-agent MDP framework where agents repeatedly solve a task in a collaborative setting. We study the problem of designing a learning algorithm for the first agent (A1) that facilitates a successful collaboration even in cases when the second agent (A2) is adapting its policy in an unknown way. The key challenge in our setting is that the first agent faces non-stationarity in rewards and transitions because of the adaptive behavior of the second agent. We design novel online learning algorithms for agent A1 whose regret decays as $O(T^{1-\frac{3}{7} \cdot \alpha})$ with $T$ learning episodes provided that the magnitude of agent A2’s policy changes between any two consecutive episodes are upper bounded by $O(T^{-\alpha})$. Here, the parameter $\alpha$ is assumed to be strictly greater than $0$, and we show that this assumption is necessary provided that the learning parity with noise problem is computationally hard. We show that sub-linear regret of agent A1 further implies near-optimality of the agents’ joint return for MDPs that manifest the properties of a smooth game. Goran Radanovic, Rati Devidze, David C. Parkes, Adish Singla |
ICML | 2 |
| 2019 | Interactive Teaching Algorithms for Inverse Reinforcement LearningabstractWe study the problem of inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) with the added twist that the learner is assisted by a helpful teacher. More formally, we tackle the following algorithmic question: How could a teacher provide an informative sequence of demonstrations to an IRL learner to speed up the learning process? We present an interactive teaching framework where a teacher adaptively chooses the next demonstration based on learner's current policy. In particular, we design teaching algorithms for two concrete settings: an omniscient setting where a teacher has full knowledge about the learner's dynamics and a blackbox setting where the teacher has minimal knowledge. Then, we study a sequential variant of the popular MCE-IRL learner and prove convergence guarantees of our teaching algorithm in the omniscient setting. Extensive experiments with a car driving simulator environment show that the learning progress can be speeded up drastically as compared to an uninformative teacher. Parameswaran Kamalaruban, Rati Devidze, Volkan Cevher, Adish Singla |
IJCAI | 2 |
| 2019 | Learner-aware Teaching: Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Preferences and ConstraintsabstractInverse reinforcement learning (IRL) enables an agent to learn complex behavior by observing demonstrations from a (near-)optimal policy. The typical assumption is that the learner's goal is to match the teacher’s demonstrated behavior. In this paper, we consider the setting where the learner has its own preferences that it additionally takes into consideration. These preferences can for example capture behavioral biases, mismatched worldviews, or physical constraints. We study two teaching approaches: learner-agnostic teaching, where the teacher provides demonstrations from an optimal policy ignoring the learner's preferences, and learner-aware teaching, where the teacher accounts for the learner’s preferences. We design learner-aware teaching algorithms and show that significant performance improvements can be achieved over learner-agnostic teaching. Sebastian Tschiatschek, Ahana Ghosh, Luis Haug, Rati Devidze, Adish Singla |
NeurIPS | 4 |