mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Paradox of Choice: Using Attention in Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning

arXiv 2201.09653 ↗First posted 24 Jan 2022cs.LG cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Decision-making AI agents are often faced with two important challenges: the depth of the planning horizon, and the branching factor due to having many choices. Hierarchical reinforcement learning methods aim to solve the first problem, by providing shortcuts that skip over multiple time steps. To cope with the breadth, it is desirable to restrict the agent's attention at each step to a reasonable number of possible choices. The concept of affordances (Gibson, 1977) suggests that only certain actions are feasible in certain states. In this work, we model "affordances" through an attention mechanism that limits the available choices of temporally extended options. We present an online, model-free algorithm to learn affordances that can be used to further learn subgoal options. We investigate the role of hard versus soft attention in training data collection, abstract value learning in long-horizon tasks, and handling a growing number of choices. We identify and empirically illustrate the settings in which the paradox of choice arises, i.e. when having fewer but more meaningful choices improves the learning speed and performance of a reinforcement learning agent.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jan 2022.

Builds on

19 of 54 references.

References · 19

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  3. 2014Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translatecited by 4,530
  4. 2015Show, Attend and Tell: Neural Image Caption Generation with Visual Attentioncited by 1,421
  5. 2015Effective Approaches to Attention-based Neural Machine Translationcited by 1,024
  6. 2018Data-Efficient Hierarchical Reinforcement Learningcited by 436
  7. 2017FeUdal Networks for Hierarchical Reinforcement Learningcited by 328
  8. 2016Hierarchical Deep Reinforcement Learning: Integrating Temporal Abstraction and Intrinsic Motivationcited by 282
  9. 2018Multi-Goal Reinforcement Learning: Challenging Robotics Environments and Request for Researchcited by 256
  10. 2015Salient Object Detection: A Benchmarkcited by 130
  11. 2015An Emphatic Approach to the Problem of Off-policy Temporal-Difference Learningcited by 103
  12. 2013Empowerment -- an Introductioncited by 65
7 more
  1. 2016Unifying task specification in reinforcement learningcited by 41
  2. 2020Deep Affordance Foresight: Planning Through What Can Be Done in the Futurecited by 41
  3. 2020What can I do here? A Theory of Affordances in Reinforcement Learningcited by 33
  4. 2020Options of Interest: Temporal Abstraction with Interest Functionscited by 30
  5. 2019The Termination Criticcited by 24
  6. 2021Temporally Abstract Partial Modelscited by 11
  7. 2018Multi-modal Feedback for Affordance-driven Interactive Reinforcement Learningcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

2 papers.