Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Xiu Yuan
dblp:393/4057
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
imitation learning |
1.7 | 2 | 2025 | 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 |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › policy optimization
residual policy learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › deep reinforcement learning
visual reinforcement learning |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning? · AAAI 2025 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation
grasping |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy Model · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › deep reinforcement learning
visual policy learning |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | 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
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | When Should We Prefer State-to-Visual DAgger over Visual Reinforcement Learning?abstractLearning 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 |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2025 | Policy Decorator: Model-Agnostic Online Refinement for Large Policy ModelabstractRecent 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 |
ICLR | 1 |