ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2021
Machine Teaching for Human Inverse Reinforcement Learning.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As robots continue to acquire useful skills, their ability to teach their expertise will provide humans the two-fold benefit of learning from robots and collaborating fluently with them. For example, robot tutors could teach handwriting to individual students and delivery robots could convey their navigation conventions to better coordinate with nearby human workers. Because humans naturally communicate their behaviors through selective demonstrations, and comprehend others' through reasoning that resembles inverse reinforcement learning (IRL), we propose a method of teaching humans based on demonstrations that are informative for IRL. But unlike prior work that optimizes solely for IRL, this paper incorporates various human teaching strategies (e.g. scaffolding, simplicity, pattern discovery, and testing) to better accommodate human learners. We assess our method with user studies and find that our measure of test difficulty corresponds well with human performance and confidence, and also find that favoring simplicity and pattern discovery increases human performance on difficult tests. However, we did not find a strong effect for our method of scaffolding, revealing shortcomings that indicate clear directions for future work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.