What Is Acceptably Safe for Reinforcement Learning?

Machine Learning algorithms are becoming more prevalent in critical systems where dynamic decision making and efficiency are the goal. As is the case for complex and safety-critical systems, where certain failures can lead to harm, we must proactively consider the safety assurance of such systems that use Machine Learning. In this paper we explore the implications of the use of Reinforcement Learning in particular, considering the potential benefits that it could bring to safety-critical systems, and our ability to provide assurances on the safety of systems incorporating such technology. We propose a high-level argument that could be used as the basis of a safety case for Reinforcement Learning systems, where the selection of ‘reward’ and ‘cost’ mechanisms would have a critical effect on the outcome of decisions made. We conclude with fundamental challenges that will need to be addressed to give the confidence necessary for deploying Reinforcement Learning within safety-critical applications.

[1]  Tim Kelly,et al.  Arguing Safety - A Systematic Approach to Managing Safety Cases , 1998 .

[2]  Roman V. Yampolskiy,et al.  Artificial Intelligence Safety Engineering: Why Machine Ethics Is a Wrong Approach , 2011, PT-AI.

[3]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Safety-I and Safety-II: The Past and Future of Safety Management , 2014 .

[4]  Eliezer Yudkowsky,et al.  The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence , 2014, Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security.

[5]  Ibrahim Habli,et al.  The Moral Responsibility Gap and the Increasing Autonomy of Systems , 2018, SAFECOMP Workshops.

[6]  Nancy G. Leveson,et al.  A systems approach to risk management through leading safety indicators , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[7]  David John Pumfrey,et al.  The principled design of computer system safety analyses , 1999 .

[8]  Tim Kelly,et al.  Incorporating Epistemic Uncertainty into the Safety Assurance of Socio-Technical Systems , 2017, CREST@ETAPS.

[9]  E. Hollnagel,et al.  From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper , 2014 .

[10]  John Schulman,et al.  Concrete Problems in AI Safety , 2016, ArXiv.

[11]  A. Morris,et al.  Care A H Morris environments Decision support and safety of clinical , 2002 .

[12]  John Rushby Logic and Epistemology in Safety Cases , 2013, SAFECOMP.

[13]  Michael Fisher,et al.  Formal verification of ethical choices in autonomous systems , 2016, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[14]  Jose M. Faria,et al.  Non-determinism and Failure Modes in Machine Learning , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops (ISSREW).

[15]  Radu Calinescu,et al.  Assured Reinforcement Learning with Formally Verified Abstract Policies , 2017, ICAART.

[16]  Ewen Denney,et al.  Dynamic Safety Cases for Through-Life Safety Assurance , 2015, 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering.

[17]  Radu Calinescu,et al.  Emerging Techniques for the Engineering of Self-Adaptive High-Integrity Software , 2013, Assurances for Self-Adaptive Systems.

[18]  Javier García,et al.  A comprehensive survey on safe reinforcement learning , 2015, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[19]  Patrik Feth,et al.  A Conceptual Safety Supervisor Definition and Evaluation Framework for Autonomous Systems , 2017, SAFECOMP.