Preserving the Privacy of Reward Functions in MDPs through Deception
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Preserving the privacy of preferences (or rewards) of a sequential decision-making agent when decisions are observable is crucial in many physical and cybersecurity domains. For instance, in wildlife monitoring, agents must allocate patrolling resources without revealing animal locations to poachers. This paper addresses privacy preservation in planning over a sequence of actions in MDPs, where the reward function represents the preference structure to be protected. Observers can use Inverse RL (IRL) to learn these preferences, making this a challenging task. Current research on differential privacy in reward functions fails to ensure guarantee on the minimum expected reward and offers theoretical guarantees that are inadequate against IRL-based observers. To bridge this gap, we propose a novel approach rooted in the theory of deception. Deception includes two models: dissimulation (hiding the truth) and simulation (showing the wrong). Our first contribution theoretically demonstrates significant privacy leaks in existing dissimulation-based methods. Our second contribution is a novel RL-based planning algorithm that uses simulation to effectively address these privacy concerns while ensuring a guarantee on the expected reward. Experiments on multiple benchmark problems show that our approach outperforms previous methods in preserving reward function privacy.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Jul 2024.
Builds on
17 of 35 references.
References · 17
- 2018Soft Actor-Critic: Off-Policy Maximum Entropy Deep Reinforcement Learning with a Stochastic Actorcited by 4,635
- 2021Convex optimizationcited by 2,479
- 2016Generative Adversarial Imitation Learningcited by 1,576
- 2023Minigrid & Miniworld: Modular & Customizable Reinforcement Learning Environments for Goal-Oriented Taskscited by 320
- 2019Adversarial Policies: Attacking Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 209
- 2021IQ-Learn: Inverse soft-Q Learning for Imitationcited by 191
- 2020Quantifying Differences in Reward Functionscited by 62
- 2020Private Reinforcement Learning with PAC and Regret Guaranteescited by 51
- 2022imitation: Clean Imitation Learning Implementationscited by 34
- 2019Privacy-preserving Q-Learning with Functional Noise in Continuous State Spacescited by 29
- 2022Misspecification in Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 27
- 2022Differentially Private Reinforcement Learning with Linear Function Approximationcited by 22
5 more
- 2021Deceptive Reinforcement Learning for Privacy-Preserving Planningcited by 14
- 2018Deception in Optimal Controlcited by 10
- 2023Deceptive Reinforcement Learning in Model-Free Domainscited by 7
- 2019A Survey of Moving Target Defenses for Network Securitycited by 5
- 2021How Private Is Your RL Policy? An Inverse RL Based Analysis Frameworkcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.