mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Contrastive Learning from Exploratory Actions: Leveraging Natural Interactions for Preference Elicitation

arXiv 2501.01367 ↗First posted 2 Jan 2025cs.RO cs.AI cs.HCcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

People have a variety of preferences for how robots behave. To understand and reason about these preferences, robots aim to learn a reward function that describes how aligned robot behaviors are with a user's preferences. Good representations of a robot's behavior can significantly reduce the time and effort required for a user to teach the robot their preferences. Specifying these representations -- what "features" of the robot's behavior matter to users -- remains a difficult problem; Features learned from raw data lack semantic meaning and features learned from user data require users to engage in tedious labeling processes. Our key insight is that users tasked with customizing a robot are intrinsically motivated to produce labels through exploratory search; they explore behaviors that they find interesting and ignore behaviors that are irrelevant. To harness this novel data source of exploratory actions, we propose contrastive learning from exploratory actions (CLEA) to learn trajectory features that are aligned with features that users care about. We learned CLEA features from exploratory actions users performed in an open-ended signal design activity (N=25) with a Kuri robot, and evaluated CLEA features through a second user study with a different set of users (N=42). CLEA features outperformed self-supervised features when eliciting user preferences over four metrics: completeness, simplicity, minimality, and explainability.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 46 of its 94 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jan 2025.

Builds on

46 of 94 references.

References · 46

  1. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
  2. 2018Recurrent World Models Facilitate Policy Evolutioncited by 761
  3. 2020CURL: Contrastive Unsupervised Representations for Reinforcement Learningcited by 745
  4. 2021AST: Audio Spectrogram Transformercited by 634
  5. 2017A Brief Survey of Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 466
  6. 2014Deep metric learning using Triplet networkcited by 421
  7. 2021PEBBLE: Feedback-Efficient Interactive Reinforcement Learning via Relabeling Experience and Unsupervised Pre-trainingcited by 298
  8. 2022X-CLIP: End-to-End Multi-grained Contrastive Learning for Video-Text Retrievalcited by 279
  9. 2019Extrapolating Beyond Suboptimal Demonstrations via Inverse Reinforcement Learning from Observationscited by 256
  10. 2017Inverse Reward Designcited by 246
  11. 2018Deep k-Nearest Neighbors: Towards Confident, Interpretable and Robust Deep Learningcited by 203
  12. 2016Generating Visual Explanationscited by 156
34 more
  1. 2017Person Search with Natural Language Descriptioncited by 149
  2. 2024RL-VLM-F: Reinforcement Learning from Vision Language Foundation Model Feedbackcited by 147
  3. 2022Weakly supervised causal representation learningcited by 140
  4. 2023RoboCLIP: One Demonstration is Enough to Learn Robot Policiescited by 128
  5. 2021Learning Language-Conditioned Robot Behavior from Offline Data and Crowd-Sourced Annotationcited by 117
  6. 2021Representation Matters: Offline Pretraining for Sequential Decision Makingcited by 90
  7. 2020Learning from Suboptimal Demonstration via Self-Supervised Reward Regressioncited by 84
  8. 2021Self-Supervised Pretraining Improves Self-Supervised Pretrainingcited by 81
  9. 2015The Bayesian Case Model: A Generative Approach for Case-Based Reasoning and Prototype Classificationcited by 76
  10. 2020Safe Imitation Learning via Fast Bayesian Reward Inference from Preferencescited by 73
  11. 2020Learning Reward Functions from Diverse Sources of Human Feedback: Optimally Integrating Demonstrations and Preferencescited by 71
  12. 2020Active Preference-Based Gaussian Process Regression for Reward Learningcited by 70
  13. 2019Asking Easy Questions: A User-Friendly Approach to Active Reward Learningcited by 67
  14. 2023Grounding Complex Natural Language Commands for Temporal Tasks in Unseen Environmentscited by 52
  15. 2021Learning Multimodal Rewards from Rankingscited by 41
  16. 2020The EMPATHIC Framework for Task Learning from Implicit Human Feedbackcited by 38
  17. 2022Approximating Gradients for Differentiable Quality Diversity in Reinforcement Learningcited by 37
  18. 2019Dataset search: a surveycited by 36
  19. 2014Efficient Model Learning for Human-Robot Collaborative Taskscited by 35
  20. 2022Click-Through Rate Prediction in Online Advertising: A Literature Reviewcited by 31
  21. 2018Active model learning and diverse action sampling for task and motion planningcited by 28
  22. 2021Learning from Imperfect Demonstrations from Agents with Varying Dynamicscited by 26
  23. 2020Feature Expansive Reward Learning: Rethinking Human Inputcited by 25
  24. 2023Robotic Vision for Human-Robot Interaction and Collaboration: A Survey and Systematic Reviewcited by 25
  25. 2021Learning Human Objectives from Sequences of Physical Correctionscited by 21
  26. 2021Learning Elastic Embeddings for Customizing On-Device Recommenderscited by 19
  27. 2018Including Uncertainty when Learning from Human Correctionscited by 15
  28. 2023SIRL: Similarity-based Implicit Representation Learningcited by 13
  29. 2023Aligning Robot and Human Representationscited by 11
  30. 2022Task-Induced Representation Learningcited by 10
  31. 2022Using Design Metaphors to Understand User Expectations of Socially Interactive Robot Embodimentscited by 6
  32. 2021Personalizing User Engagement Dynamics in a Non-Verbal Communication Game for Cerebral Palsycited by 4
  33. 2024POE: Acoustic Soft Robotic Proprioception for Omnidirectional End-effectorscited by 3
  34. 2024The RoSiD Tool: Empowering Users to Design Multimodal Signals for Human-Robot Collaborationcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.