Papers › Expectation Alignment: Handling Reward Misspecification in the Presence of Expectation Mismatch

Expectation Alignment: Handling Reward Misspecification in the Presence of Expectation Mismatch

12 Apr 2024arXiv:2404.08791archive 2025-07-28

Malek Mechergui, Sarath Sreedharan

Detecting and handling misspecified objectives, such as reward functions, has been widely recognized as one of the central challenges within the domain of Artificial Intelligence (AI) safety research. However, even with the recognition of the importance of this problem, we are unaware of any works that attempt to provide a clear definition for what constitutes (a) misspecified objectives and (b) successfully resolving such misspecifications. In this work, we use the theory of mind, i.e., the human user's beliefs about the AI agent, as a basis to develop a formal explanatory framework called Expectation Alignment (EAL) to understand the objective misspecification and its causes. Our EAL framework not only acts as an explanatory framework for existing works but also provides us with concrete insights into the limitations of existing methods to handle reward misspecification and novel solution strategies. We use these insights to propose a new interactive algorithm that uses the specified reward to infer potential user expectations about the system behavior. We show how one can efficiently implement this algorithm by mapping the inference problem into linear programs. We evaluate our method on a set of standard Markov Decision Process (MDP) benchmarks.

PaperPDFCode

Code

malek-mechergui/codemdp officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

AI Agent

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

SET

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections