mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Rewards Encoding Environment Dynamics Improves Preference-based Reinforcement Learning

arXiv 2211.06527 ↗First posted 12 Nov 2022cs.LG cs.AI cs.HCcited by 3

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward modeling and RLHF

Abstract (arXiv)

Preference-based reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms help avoid the pitfalls of hand-crafted reward functions by distilling them from human preference feedback, but they remain impractical due to the burdensome number of labels required from the human, even for relatively simple tasks. In this work, we demonstrate that encoding environment dynamics in the reward function (REED) dramatically reduces the number of preference labels required in state-of-the-art preference-based RL frameworks. We hypothesize that REED-based methods better partition the state-action space and facilitate generalization to state-action pairs not included in the preference dataset. REED iterates between encoding environment dynamics in a state-action representation via a self-supervised temporal consistency task, and bootstrapping the preference-based reward function from the state-action representation. Whereas prior approaches train only on the preference-labelled trajectory pairs, REED exposes the state-action representation to all transitions experienced during policy training. We explore the benefits of REED within the PrefPPO [1] and PEBBLE [2] preference learning frameworks and demonstrate improvements across experimental conditions to both the speed of policy learning and the final policy performance. For example, on quadruped-walk and walker-walk with 50 preference labels, REED-based reward functions recover 83% and 66% of ground truth reward policy performance and without REED only 38% and 21% are recovered. For some domains, REED-based reward functions result in policies that outperform policies trained on the ground truth reward.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reward modeling and RLHF, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 33 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Nov 2022.

Builds on

33 of 51 references.

Closest ancestors · 8

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2022SURF: Semi-supervised Reward Learning with Data Augmentation for Feedback-efficient Preference-based Reinforcement Learning18 Mar
  2. 2021Skill Preferences: Learning to Extract and Execute Robotic Skills from Human Feedback11 Aug
  3. 2021PEBBLE: Feedback-Efficient Interactive Reinforcement Learning via Relabeling Experience and Unsupervised Pre-training9 Jun
  4. 2020Active Preference-Based Gaussian Process Regression for Reward Learning6 May
  5. 2019Deep Reinforcement Learning from Policy-Dependent Human Feedback12 Feb
  6. 2018Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research direction19 Nov
  7. 2018Reward learning from human preferences and demonstrations in Atari15 Nov
  8. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences12 Jun

Other references · 25

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
  3. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
  4. 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,662
  5. 2018Soft Actor-Critic: Off-Policy Maximum Entropy Deep Reinforcement Learning with a Stochastic Actorcited by 4,635
  6. 2020Exploring Simple Siamese Representation Learningcited by 2,853
  7. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
  8. 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
  9. 2018Learning Latent Dynamics for Planning from Pixelscited by 1,221
  10. 2019Meta-World: A Benchmark and Evaluation for Multi-Task and Meta Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,168
  11. 2018DeepMind Control Suitecited by 935
  12. 2020Learning Invariant Representations for Reinforcement Learning without Reconstructioncited by 424
13 more
  1. 2020Data-Efficient Reinforcement Learning with Self-Predictive Representationscited by 309
  2. 2016Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 298
  3. 2021Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedbackcited by 287
  4. 2017Inverse Reward Designcited by 246
  5. 2021Mastering Atari Games with Limited Datacited by 235
  6. 2019Stochastic Latent Actor-Critic: Deep Reinforcement Learning with a Latent Variable Modelcited by 228
  7. 2017Interactive Learning from Policy-Dependent Human Feedbackcited by 155
  8. 2017Deep TAMER: Interactive Agent Shaping in High-Dimensional State Spacescited by 122
  9. 2019End-to-End Robotic Reinforcement Learning without Reward Engineeringcited by 115
  10. 2021B-Pref: Benchmarking Preference-Based Reinforcement Learningcited by 106
  11. 2019AVID: Learning Multi-Stage Tasks via Pixel-Level Translation of Human Videoscited by 105
  12. 2018Batch Active Preference-Based Learning of Reward Functionscited by 87
  13. 2020Deep Reinforcement and InfoMax Learningcited by 79

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Sample-Efficient Preference-based Reinforcement Learning with Dynamics Aware Rewards
  2. 2026Learning in Context, Guided by Choice: A Reward-Free Paradigm for Reinforcement Learning with Transformers
  3. 2026Specifying Reward Functions for RL Without Environment Sampling
  4. 2025Policy-labeled Preference Learning: Is Preference Enough for RLHF?
  5. 2024Efficient Preference-based Reinforcement Learning via Aligned Experience Estimation
  6. 2023Inverse Preference Learning: Preference-based RL without a Reward Function
  7. 2025Similarity as Reward Alignment: Robust and Versatile Preference-based Reinforcement Learning
  8. 2026From Reward-Free Representations to Preferences: Rethinking Offline Preference-Based Reinforcement Learning