Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Robustness Evaluation of Offline Reinforcement Learning for Robot Control Against Action Perturbations

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2412.18781 v2 pith:KRC6W63L submitted 2024-12-25 cs.RO cs.LG

classification cs.ROcs.LG
keywords learningreinforcementofflinerobustnessmethodsperturbationsactioncontrol
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Offline reinforcement learning, which learns solely from datasets without environmental interaction, has gained attention. This approach, similar to traditional online deep reinforcement learning, is particularly promising for robot control applications. Nevertheless, its robustness against real-world challenges, such as joint actuator faults in robots, remains a critical concern. This study evaluates the robustness of existing offline reinforcement learning methods using legged robots from OpenAI Gym based on average episodic rewards. For robustness evaluation, we simulate failures by incorporating both random and adversarial perturbations, representing worst-case scenarios, into the joint torque signals. Our experiments show that existing offline reinforcement learning methods exhibit significant vulnerabilities to these action perturbations and are more vulnerable than online reinforcement learning methods, highlighting the need for more robust approaches in this field.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. AI4Research: A Survey of Artificial Intelligence for Scientific Research

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes AI-for-research work into five tasks, comprehension, survey, discovery, writing, and peer review, and compiles associated tools and benchmarks.

Pith tools