Papers › LS-IQ: Implicit Reward Regularization for Inverse Reinforcement Learning
LS-IQ: Implicit Reward Regularization for Inverse Reinforcement Learning
Firas Al-Hafez, Davide Tateo, Oleg Arenz, Guoping Zhao, Jan Peters
Recent methods for imitation learning directly learn a Q-function using an implicit reward formulation rather than an explicit reward function. However, these methods generally require implicit reward regularization to improve stability and often mistreat absorbing states. Previous works show that a squared norm regularization on the implicit reward function is effective, but do not provide a theoretical analysis of the resulting properties of the algorithms. In this work, we show that using this regularizer under a mixture distribution of the policy and the expert provides a particularly illuminating perspective: the original objective can be understood as squared Bellman error minimization, and the corresponding optimization problem minimizes a bounded χ²-Divergence between the expert and the mixture distribution. This perspective allows us to address instabilities and properly treat absorbing states. We show that our method, Least Squares Inverse Q-Learning (LS-IQ), outperforms state-of-the-art algorithms, particularly in environments with absorbing states. Finally, we propose to use an inverse dynamics model to learn from observations only. Using this approach, we retain performance in settings where no expert actions are available.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
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
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
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