about
Laser: Learning a Latent Action Space for Efficient Reinforcement Learning (arxiv.org)
65 points by tosh on Apr 4, 2021 | hide | past | pdf | 9 comments on HN

In plain words: LASER learns a small set of useful robot moves from example trajectories, then trains the policy to pick among those instead of every raw command. On two simulated contact-rich manipulation tasks, it reached solutions with fewer training samples than the usual full action space.

Abstract · LASER: Learning a Latent Action Space for Efficient Reinforcement Learning

The process of learning a manipulation task depends strongly on the action space used for exploration: posed in the incorrect action space, solving a task with reinforcement learning can be drastically inefficient. Additionally, similar tasks or instances of the same task family impose latent manifold constraints on the most effective action space: the task family can be best solved with actions in a manifold of the entire action space of the robot. Combining these insights we present LASER, a method to learn latent action spaces for efficient reinforcement learning. LASER factorizes the learning problem into two sub-problems, namely action space learning and policy learning in the new action space. It leverages data from similar manipulation task instances, either from an offline expert or online during policy learning, and learns from these trajectories a mapping from the original to a latent action space. LASER is trained as a variational encoder-decoder model to map raw actions into a disentangled latent action space while maintaining action reconstruction and latent space dynamic consistency. We evaluate LASER on two contact-rich robotic tasks in simulation, and analyze the benefit of policy learning in the generated latent action space. We show improved sample efficiency compared to the original action space from better alignment of the action space to the task space, as we observe with visualizations of the learned action space manifold. Additional details: https://www.pair.toronto.edu/laser

Arthur Allshire, Roberto Martín-Martín, Charles Lin, Shawn Manuel, Silvio Savarese, Animesh Garg
arXiv:2103.15793 · cs.RO, cs.AI · submitted Mar 29, 2021 · updated Mar 30, 2021
abstract · pdf · html · Accepted as a conference paper at ICRA 2021. 7 pages, 8 figures

add comment on HN

More info (including a video):

https://www.pair.toronto.edu/laser/

Department of Redundancy Department (please knock twice, please)
There was already a LASER method in reinforcement learning :-/

LArge Scale Experience Replay - https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.11583

I am missing a link between the two?

Teams who really stretched to come up with a cool acronym?
So they manually restricted the search space for possible answers and it went faster, like a LASER? Is this April Fools?
They used a variational autoencoder where the latent space representation is disentangled.

That approach is a promising way to make it easier to navigate the latent space as changes in one dimension will have a reduced or no influence on other aspects of the data encoded.

Here is a nice overview on disentanglement with further references: https://paperswithcode.com/method/beta-vae

Looks like they used a variational encoder-decoder net to reduce the dimensionality of the action space.

Not manual and it sounds like a good idea.

Author here, was pretty surprised to see this on HN when browsing over my coffee this morning. Your interpretation is correct, you use an encoder-decoder model to figure out what the dimensions of the task best for learning are.

The drawback is you can only learn tasks which are relatively similar (any time you restrict what motions are possible to improve learning, you obviously restrict what tasks are possible). The benefit is that you can learn tasks which do fall within the learned motion ranges a lot more quickly.

The best analogy within 'classical' control is task space control, where you do control in cartesian dimensions rather than the joint positions. But this has its own drawbacks in that you have to define these controllers manually, and Cartesian space is not sufficiently expressive / appropriate for many tasks.

Ludicrous acronyms shirk efficient reasoning.