Willem Röpke

Peter Vamplew, Cameron Foale, Conor F. Hayes et al.

Research in multi-objective reinforcement learning (MORL) has introduced the utility-based paradigm, which makes use of both environmental rewards and a function that defines the utility derived by the user from those rewards. In this paper we extend this paradigm to the context of single-objective reinforcement learning (RL), and outline multiple potential benefits including the ability to perform multi-policy learning across tasks relating to uncertain objectives, risk-aware RL, discounting, and safe RL. We also examine the algorithmic implications of adopting a utility-based approach.

Dimitris Michailidis, Willem Röpke, Diederik M. Roijers et al.

Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning (MORL) aims to learn a set of policies that optimize trade-offs between multiple, often conflicting objectives. MORL is computationally more complex than single-objective RL, particularly as the number of objectives increases. Additionally, when objectives involve the preferences of agents or groups, ensuring fairness is socially desirable. This paper introduces a principled algorithm that incorporates fairness into MORL while improving scalability to many-objective problems. We propose using Lorenz dominance to identify policies with equitable reward distributions and introduce λ-Lorenz dominance to enable flexible fairness preferences. We release a new, large-scale real-world transport planning environment and demonstrate that our method encourages the discovery of fair policies, showing improved scalability in two large cities (Xi'an and Amsterdam). Our methods outperform common multi-objective approaches, particularly in high-dimensional objective spaces.

Willem Röpke, Mathieu Reymond, Patrick Mannion et al.

An important challenge in multi-objective reinforcement learning is obtaining a Pareto front of policies to attain optimal performance under different preferences. We introduce Iterated Pareto Referent Optimisation (IPRO), which decomposes finding the Pareto front into a sequence of constrained single-objective problems. This enables us to guarantee convergence while providing an upper bound on the distance to undiscovered Pareto optimal solutions at each step. We evaluate IPRO using utility-based metrics and its hypervolume and find that it matches or outperforms methods that require additional assumptions. By leveraging problem-specific single-objective solvers, our approach also holds promise for applications beyond multi-objective reinforcement learning, such as planning and pathfinding.

Willem Röpke, Conor F. Hayes, Patrick Mannion et al.

For effective decision support in scenarios with conflicting objectives, sets of potentially optimal solutions can be presented to the decision maker. We explore both what policies these sets should contain and how such sets can be computed efficiently. With this in mind, we take a distributional approach and introduce a novel dominance criterion relating return distributions of policies directly. Based on this criterion, we present the distributional undominated set and show that it contains optimal policies otherwise ignored by the Pareto front. In addition, we propose the convex distributional undominated set and prove that it comprises all policies that maximise expected utility for multivariate risk-averse decision makers. We propose a novel algorithm to learn the distributional undominated set and further contribute pruning operators to reduce the set to the convex distributional undominated set. Through experiments, we demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of these methods, making this a valuable new approach for decision support in real-world problems.

Willem Röpke, Diederik M. Roijers, Ann Nowé et al.

We consider preference communication in two-player multi-objective normal-form games. In such games, the payoffs resulting from joint actions are vector-valued. Taking a utility-based approach, we assume there exists a utility function for each player which maps vectors to scalar utilities and consider agents that aim to maximise the utility of expected payoff vectors. As agents typically do not know their opponent's utility function or strategy, they must learn policies to interact with each other. Inspired by Stackelberg games, we introduce four novel preference communication protocols to aid agents in arriving at adequate solutions. Each protocol describes a specific approach for one agent to communicate preferences over their actions and how another agent responds. Additionally, to study when communication emerges, we introduce a communication protocol where agents must learn when to communicate. These protocols are subsequently evaluated on a set of five benchmark games against baseline agents that do not communicate. We find that preference communication can alter the learning process and lead to the emergence of cyclic policies which had not been previously observed in this setting. We further observe that the resulting policies can heavily depend on the characteristics of the game that is played. Lastly, we find that communication naturally emerges in both cooperative and self-interested settings.