Evolving Soccer Keepaway Players Through Task Decomposition

Complex control tasks can often be solved by decomposing them into hierarchies of manageable subtasks. Such decompositions require designers to decide how much human knowledge should be used to help learn the resulting components. On one hand, encoding human knowledge requires manual effort and may incorrectly constrain the learner’s hypothesis space or guide it away from the best solutions. On the other hand, it may make learning easier and enable the learner to tackle more complex tasks. This article examines the impact of this trade-off in tasks of varying difficulty. A space laid out by two dimensions is explored: (1) how much human assistance is given and (2) how difficult the task is. In particular, the neuroevolution learning algorithm is enhanced with three different methods for learning the components that result from a task decomposition. The first method, coevolution, is mostly unassisted by human knowledge. The second method, layered learning, is highly assisted. The third method, concurrent layered learning, is a novel combination of the first two that attempts to exploit human knowledge while retaining some of coevolution’s flexibility. Detailed empirical results are presented comparing and contrasting these three approaches on two versions of a complex task, namely robot soccer keepaway, that differ in difficulty of learning. These results confirm that, given a suitable task decomposition, neuroevolution can master difficult tasks. Furthermore, they demonstrate that the appropriate level of human assistance depends critically on the difficulty of the problem.

[1]  Rodney A. Brooks,et al.  A Robust Layered Control Syste For A Mobile Robot , 2022 .

[2]  M. V. Rossum,et al.  In Neural Computation , 2022 .

[3]  Rodney A. Brooks,et al.  Learning to Coordinate Behaviors , 1990, AAAI.

[4]  L. Darrell Whitley,et al.  Delta Coding: An Iterative Search Strategy for Genetic Algorithms , 1991, ICGA.

[5]  Sridhar Mahadevan,et al.  Scaling Reinforcement Learning to Robotics by Exploiting the Subsumption Architecture , 1991, ML.

[6]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Feudal Reinforcement Learning , 1992, NIPS.

[7]  Long-Ji Lin,et al.  Reinforcement learning for robots using neural networks , 1992 .

[8]  J. D. Schaffer,et al.  Combinations of genetic algorithms and neural networks: a survey of the state of the art , 1992, [Proceedings] COGANN-92: International Workshop on Combinations of Genetic Algorithms and Neural Networks.

[9]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Efficient Learning from Delayed Rewards through Symbiotic Evolution , 1995, ICML.

[10]  Richard K. Belew,et al.  Methods for Competitive Co-Evolution: Finding Opponents Worth Beating , 1995, ICGA.

[11]  Sandip Sen,et al.  Evolving Beharioral Strategies in Predators and Prey , 1995, Adaption and Learning in Multi-Agent Systems.

[12]  Andrew W. Moore,et al.  Reinforcement Learning: A Survey , 1996, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[13]  Larry D. Pyeatt,et al.  A comparison between cellular encoding and direct encoding for genetic neural networks , 1996 .

[14]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Incremental Evolution of Complex General Behavior , 1997, Adapt. Behav..

[15]  Larry D. Pyeatt,et al.  Learning to Race: Experiments with a Simulated Race Car , 1998, FLAIRS.

[16]  Manuela M. Veloso,et al.  Layered Approach to Learning Client Behaviors in the Robocup Soccer Server , 1998, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[17]  Ian Frank,et al.  Soccer Server: A Tool for Research on Multiagent Systems , 1998, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[18]  Thomas G. Dietterich The MAXQ Method for Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning , 1998, ICML.

[19]  E. Gat On Three-Layer Architectures , 1997 .

[20]  J. Pollack,et al.  Challenges in coevolutionary learning: arms-race dynamics, open-endedness, and medicocre stable states , 1998 .

[21]  X. Yao Evolving Artificial Neural Networks , 1999 .

[22]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Solving Non-Markovian Control Tasks with Neuro-Evolution , 1999, IJCAI.

[23]  Kenneth A. De Jong,et al.  Cooperative Coevolution: An Architecture for Evolving Coadapted Subcomponents , 2000, Evolutionary Computation.

[24]  Peter Stone,et al.  Layered learning in multiagent systems - a winning approach to robotic soccer , 2000, Intelligent robotics and autonomous agents.

[25]  Minoru Asada,et al.  Overview of RoboCup-2000 , 2001, RoboCup.

[26]  Manuela M. Veloso,et al.  Layered Learning , 2000, ECML.

[27]  Peter Stone,et al.  RoboCup 2000: Robot Soccer World Cup IV , 2001, RoboCup.

[28]  Peter Stone,et al.  An architecture for action selection in robotic soccer , 2001, AGENTS '01.

[29]  Peter Stone,et al.  Keepaway Soccer: A Machine Learning Testbed , 2001, RoboCup.

[30]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  COOPERATIVE COEVOLUTION OF MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS , 2001 .

[31]  Peter Stone,et al.  Scaling Reinforcement Learning toward RoboCup Soccer , 2001, ICML.

[32]  Paul E. Utgoff,et al.  Many-Layered Learning , 2002, Neural Computation.

[33]  Benjamin Kuipers,et al.  Bootstrap learning for place recognition , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[34]  Steven M. Gustafson,et al.  Genetic Programming And Multi-agent Layered Learning By Reinforcements , 2002, GECCO.

[35]  R. Lyndon While,et al.  Learning In RoboCup Keepaway Using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2002, GECCO.

[36]  Andreas Birk,et al.  RoboCup 2001: Robot Soccer World Cup V , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[37]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Neuroevolution for adaptive teams , 2003, The 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2003. CEC '03..

[38]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Active Guidance for a Finless Rocket Using Neuroevolution , 2003, GECCO.

[39]  Shimon Whiteson,et al.  Concurrent layered learning , 2003, AAMAS '03.

[40]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Robust non-linear control through neuroevolution , 2003 .

[41]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Competitive Coevolution through Evolutionary Complexification , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[42]  Risto Miikkulainen,et al.  Efficient Reinforcement Learning through Symbiotic Evolution , 2004 .