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

Xiu Yuan

dblp:393/4057 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 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
2 papers
Reinforcement learning · 77% Robot manipulation · 23%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
imitation learning
1.722025
Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025
When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning? · AAAI 2025
Robotics › Robot manipulation
dexterous manipulation
0.912025
Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › policy optimization
residual policy learning
0.912025
Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › deep reinforcement learning
visual reinforcement learning
0.912025
When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning? · AAAI 2025
Robotics › Robot manipulation
grasping
0.312025
Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › deep reinforcement learning
visual policy learning
0.312025
When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning? · AAAI 2025

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

state-to-visual DAgger · 0.9residual policy learning · 0.9empirical comparison · 0.9diffusion policy · 0.9controlled exploration · 0.9behavior transformer · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning?
abstract
Learning policies from high-dimensional visual inputs, such as pixels and point clouds, is crucial in various applications. Visual reinforcement learning is a promising approach that directly trains policies from visual observations, although it faces challenges in sample efficiency and computational costs. This study conducts an empirical comparison of State-to-Visual DAgger — a two-stage framework that initially trains a state policy before adopting online imitation to learn a visual policy — and Visual RL across a diverse set of tasks. We evaluate both methods across 16 tasks from three benchmarks, focusing on their asymptotic performance, sample efficiency, and computational costs. Surprisingly, our findings reveal that State-to-Visual DAgger does not universally outperform Visual RL but shows significant advantages in challenging tasks, offering more consistent performance. In contrast, its benefits in sample efficiency are less pronounced, although it often reduces the overall wall-clock time required for training. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations for practitioners and hope that our results contribute valuable perspectives for future research in visual policy learning.
Tongzhou Mu, Zhaoyang Li 0007, Stanislaw Wiktor Strzelecki, Xiu Yuan, Yunchao Yao, Litian Liang, Hao Su 0001
AAAI4
2025 Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model
abstract
Recent advancements in robot learning have used imitation learning with large models and extensive demonstrations to develop effective policies. However, these models are often limited by the quantity quality, and diversity of demonstrations. This paper explores improving offline-trained imitation learning models through online interactions with the environment. We introduce Policy Decorator, which uses a model-agnostic residual policy to refine large imitation learning models during online interactions. By implementing controlled exploration strategies, Policy Decorator enables stable, sample-efficient online learning. Our evaluation spans eight tasks across two benchmarks—ManiSkill and Adroit—and involves two state-of-the-art imitation learning models (Behavior Transformer and Diffusion Policy). The results show Policy Decorator effectively improves the offline-trained policies and preserves the smooth motion of imitation learning models, avoiding the erratic behaviors of pure RL policies. See our [project page](https://policydecorator.github.io/) for videos.
Xiu Yuan, Tongzhou Mu, Stone Tao, Yunhao Fang, Mengke Zhang, Hao Su 0001
ICLR1