Papers › Randomized algorithms and PAC bounds for inverse reinforcement learning in continuous spaces

Randomized algorithms and PAC bounds for inverse reinforcement learning in continuous spaces

24 May 2024arXiv:2405.15509archive 2025-07-28

Angeliki Kamoutsi, Peter Schmitt-Förster, Tobias Sutter, Volkan Cevher, John Lygeros

This work studies discrete-time discounted Markov decision processes with continuous state and action spaces and addresses the inverse problem of inferring a cost function from observed optimal behavior. We first consider the case in which we have access to the entire expert policy and characterize the set of solutions to the inverse problem by using occupation measures, linear duality, and complementary slackness conditions. To avoid trivial solutions and ill-posedness, we introduce a natural linear normalization constraint. This results in an infinite-dimensional linear feasibility problem, prompting a thorough analysis of its properties. Next, we use linear function approximators and adopt a randomized approach, namely the scenario approach and related probabilistic feasibility guarantees, to derive epsilon-optimal solutions for the inverse problem. We further discuss the sample complexity for a desired approximation accuracy. Finally, we deal with the more realistic case where we only have access to a finite set of expert demonstrations and a generative model and provide bounds on the error made when working with samples.

PaperPDFCode

Code

RAPACIRLCS/code officialmentioned in paperjax 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.

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