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

Thomas Bush

dblp:404/6539 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 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
Trustworthy machine learning · 61% Reinforcement learning · 30% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 9%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
concept-based explanation
0.912025
Interpreting Emergent Planning in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.912025
Interpreting Emergent Planning in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
model-free reinforcement learning
0.912025
Interpreting Emergent Planning in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning · ICLR 2025
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction › heuristic search
bidirectional search
0.312025
Interpreting Emergent Planning in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning · ICLR 2025

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

probing · 0.9mechanistic analysis · 0.9causal intervention · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Interpreting Emergent Planning in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning
abstract
We present the first mechanistic evidence that model-free reinforcement learning agents can learn to plan. This is achieved by applying a methodology based on concept-based interpretability to a model-free agent in Sokoban -- a commonly used benchmark for studying planning. Specifically, we demonstrate that DRC, a generic model-free agent introduced by [Guez et al. (2019)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.03559), uses learned concept representations to internally formulate plans that both predict the long-term effects of actions on the environment and influence action selection. Our methodology involves: (1) probing for planning-relevant concepts, (2) investigating plan formation within the agent's representations, and (3) verifying that discovered plans (in the agent's representations) have a causal effect on the agent's behavior through interventions. We also show that the emergence of these plans coincides with the emergence of a planning-like property: the ability to benefit from additional test-time compute. Finally, we perform a qualitative analysis of the planning algorithm learned by the agent and discover a strong resemblance to parallelized bidirectional search. Our findings advance understanding of the internal mechanisms underlying planning behavior in agents, which is important given the recent trend of emergent planning and reasoning capabilities in LLMs through RL.
Thomas Bush, Stephen Chung, Usman Anwar, Adrià Garriga-Alonso, David Krueger 0001
ICLR1