Skip to main content

Using ILP to Improve Planning in Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Inductive Logic Programming (ILP 2000)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1866))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Hierarchical reinforcement learning has been proposed as a solution to the problem of scaling up reinforcement learning. The RL-TOPs Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning System is an implementation of this proposal which structures an agent’s sensors and actions into various levels of representation and control. Disparity between levels of representation means actions can be misused by the planning algorithm in the system. This paper reports on how ILP was used to bridge these representation gaps and shows empirically how this improved the system’s performance. Also discussed are some of the problems encountered when using an ILP system in what is inherently a noisy and incremental domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Scott Benson. Learning Action Models for Reactive Autonomous Agents. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Thomas G. Dietterich. The maxq method for hierarchical reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning [1].

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Džeroski, S. Muggleton, and S. Russel. PAC learnability of determinate logic programs. In Proceeding of the Fifth ACM Workshop on Computational Learning Theory, pages 128–135, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sašo Džeroski, Luc De Raedt, and Hendrik Blockeel. Relational reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Inductive Logic Programming, pages 11–22, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yolanda Gil. Learning by experimentation: Incremental refinement of incomplete planning domains. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Machine Learning, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wayne Iba, James Wogulis, and Pat Langley. Trading off simplicity and coverage in incremental concept learning. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 73–79, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pat Langley. Elements of Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E. McCreath and A. Sharma. Lime: A system for learning relations. In The 9th International Workshop on Algorithmic Learning Theory. Springer-Verlag, October1998.

    Google Scholar 

  10. N. J. Nilsson. Teleo-reactive programs for agent control. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 1:139–158, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ronald Parr and Stuart Russell. Reinforcement learning with hierarchies of machines. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 10: Proceedings of the 1997 Conference, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Malcolm R. K. Ryan and Mark D. Pendrith. RL-TOPS: An architecture for modularity and re-use in reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning [1].

    Google Scholar 

  13. Malcolm R. K. Ryan and Mark Reid. Learning to fly: An application of hierarchical reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wei-Min Shen. Discovery as autonomous learning from the environment. Machine Learning, 12:143–156, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Richard S. Sutton, Doina Precup, and Satinder Singh. Between mdps and semimdps: A framework for temporal abstraction in reinforcement learning. Artificial Intelligence, 112:181–211, 1999.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Reid, M., Ryan, M. (2000). Using ILP to Improve Planning in Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning. In: Cussens, J., Frisch, A. (eds) Inductive Logic Programming. ILP 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1866. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44960-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44960-4_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67795-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44960-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics