File size: 87,523 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 | {
"paper_id": "P09-1010",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T08:55:13.421394Z"
},
"title": "Reinforcement Learning for Mapping Instructions to Actions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"R K"
],
"last": "Branavan",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory",
"institution": "Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
"location": {}
},
"email": "branavan@csail.mit.edu"
},
{
"first": "Harr",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory",
"institution": "Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Luke",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Zettlemoyer",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory",
"institution": "Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Regina",
"middle": [],
"last": "Barzilay",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory",
"institution": "Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
"location": {}
},
"email": "regina@csail.mit.edu"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "In this paper, we present a reinforcement learning approach for mapping natural language instructions to sequences of executable actions. We assume access to a reward function that defines the quality of the executed actions. During training, the learner repeatedly constructs action sequences for a set of documents, executes those actions, and observes the resulting reward. We use a policy gradient algorithm to estimate the parameters of a log-linear model for action selection. We apply our method to interpret instructions in two domains-Windows troubleshooting guides and game tutorials. Our results demonstrate that this method can rival supervised learning techniques while requiring few or no annotated training examples. 1",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P09-1010",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "In this paper, we present a reinforcement learning approach for mapping natural language instructions to sequences of executable actions. We assume access to a reward function that defines the quality of the executed actions. During training, the learner repeatedly constructs action sequences for a set of documents, executes those actions, and observes the resulting reward. We use a policy gradient algorithm to estimate the parameters of a log-linear model for action selection. We apply our method to interpret instructions in two domains-Windows troubleshooting guides and game tutorials. Our results demonstrate that this method can rival supervised learning techniques while requiring few or no annotated training examples. 1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "The problem of interpreting instructions written in natural language has been widely studied since the early days of artificial intelligence (Winograd, 1972; Di Eugenio, 1992) . Mapping instructions to a sequence of executable actions would enable the automation of tasks that currently require human participation. Examples include configuring software based on how-to guides and operating simulators using instruction manuals. In this paper, we present a reinforcement learning framework for inducing mappings from text to actions without the need for annotated training examples.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 141,
"end": 157,
"text": "(Winograd, 1972;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
},
{
"start": 158,
"end": 175,
"text": "Di Eugenio, 1992)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "For concreteness, consider instructions from a Windows troubleshooting guide on deleting temporary folders, shown in Figure 1 . We aim to map Figure 1 : A Windows troubleshooting article describing how to remove the \"msdownld.tmp\" temporary folder. this text to the corresponding low-level commands and parameters. For example, properly interpreting the third instruction requires clicking on a tab, finding the appropriate option in a tree control, and clearing its associated checkbox.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 117,
"end": 125,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 142,
"end": 150,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this and many other applications, the validity of a mapping can be verified by executing the induced actions in the corresponding environment and observing their effects. For instance, in the example above we can assess whether the goal described in the instructions is achieved, i.e., the folder is deleted. The key idea of our approach is to leverage the validation process as the main source of supervision to guide learning. This form of supervision allows us to learn interpretations of natural language instructions when standard supervised techniques are not applicable, due to the lack of human-created annotations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Reinforcement learning is a natural framework for building models using validation from an environment (Sutton and Barto, 1998) . We assume that supervision is provided in the form of a reward function that defines the quality of executed actions. During training, the learner repeatedly constructs action sequences for a set of given documents, executes those actions, and observes the resulting reward. The learner's goal is to estimate a policy -a distribution over actions given instruction text and environment state -that maximizes future expected reward. Our policy is modeled in a log-linear fashion, allowing us to incorporate features of both the instruction text and the environment. We employ a policy gradient algorithm to estimate the parameters of this model. We evaluate our method on two distinct applications: Windows troubleshooting guides and puzzle game tutorials. The key findings of our experiments are twofold. First, models trained only with simple reward signals achieve surprisingly high results, coming within 11% of a fully supervised method in the Windows domain. Second, augmenting unlabeled documents with even a small fraction of annotated examples greatly reduces this performance gap, to within 4% in that domain. These results indicate the power of learning from this new form of automated supervision.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 103,
"end": 127,
"text": "(Sutton and Barto, 1998)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Grounded Language Acquisition Our work fits into a broader class of approaches that aim to learn language from a situated context (Mooney, 2008a; Mooney, 2008b; Fleischman and Roy, 2005; Yu and Ballard, 2004; Siskind, 2001; Oates, 2001) . Instances of such approaches include work on inferring the meaning of words from video data (Roy and Pentland, 2002; Barnard and Forsyth, 2001) , and interpreting the commentary of a simulated soccer game (Chen and Mooney, 2008) . Most of these approaches assume some form of parallel data, and learn perceptual cooccurrence patterns. In contrast, our emphasis is on learning language by proactively interacting with an external environment.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 130,
"end": 145,
"text": "(Mooney, 2008a;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 146,
"end": 160,
"text": "Mooney, 2008b;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 161,
"end": 186,
"text": "Fleischman and Roy, 2005;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 187,
"end": 208,
"text": "Yu and Ballard, 2004;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
},
{
"start": 209,
"end": 223,
"text": "Siskind, 2001;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 224,
"end": 236,
"text": "Oates, 2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 331,
"end": 355,
"text": "(Roy and Pentland, 2002;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 356,
"end": 382,
"text": "Barnard and Forsyth, 2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 454,
"end": 467,
"text": "Mooney, 2008)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Reinforcement Learning for Language Processing Reinforcement learning has been previously applied to the problem of dialogue management (Scheffler and Young, 2002; Roy et al., 2000; Litman et al., 2000; Singh et al., 1999) . These systems converse with a human user by taking actions that emit natural language utterances. The reinforcement learning state space encodes information about the goals of the user and what they say at each time step. The learning problem is to find an optimal policy that maps states to actions, through a trial-and-error process of repeated interaction with the user.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 136,
"end": 163,
"text": "(Scheffler and Young, 2002;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 164,
"end": 181,
"text": "Roy et al., 2000;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
},
{
"start": 182,
"end": 202,
"text": "Litman et al., 2000;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 203,
"end": 222,
"text": "Singh et al., 1999)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Reinforcement learning is applied very differently in dialogue systems compared to our setup.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In some respects, our task is more easily amenable to reinforcement learning. For instance, we are not interacting with a human user, so the cost of interaction is lower. However, while the state space can be designed to be relatively small in the dialogue management task, our state space is determined by the underlying environment and is typically quite large. We address this complexity by developing a policy gradient algorithm that learns efficiently while exploring a small subset of the states.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Our task is to learn a mapping between documents and the sequence of actions they express. Figure 2 shows how one example sentence is mapped to three actions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 91,
"end": 99,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Mapping Text to Actions As input, we are given a document d, comprising a sequence of sentences (u 1 , . . . , u ), where each u i is a sequence of words. Our goal is to map d to a sequence of actions a = (a 0 , . . . , a n\u22121 ). Actions are predicted and executed sequentially. 2 An action a = (c, R, W ) encompasses a command c, the command's parameters R, and the words W specifying c and R. Elements of R refer to objects available in the environment state, as described below. Some parameters can also refer to words in document d. Additionally, to account for words that do not describe any actions, c can be a null command.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 278,
"end": 279,
"text": "2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The Environment The environment state E specifies the set of objects available for interaction, and their properties. In Figure 2 , E is shown on the right. The environment state E changes in response to the execution of command c with parameters R according to a transition distribution p(E |E, c, R). This distribution is a priori unknown to the learner. As we will see in Section 5, our approach avoids having to directly estimate this distribution.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 121,
"end": 129,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "State To predict actions sequentially, we need to track the state of the document-to-actions mapping over time. A mapping state s is a tuple (E, d, j, W ), where E refers to the current environment state; j is the index of the sentence currently being interpreted in document d; and W contains words that were mapped by previous actions for Figure 2 : A three-step mapping from an instruction sentence to a sequence of actions in Windows 2000. For each step, the figure shows the words selected by the action, along with the corresponding system command and its parameters. The words of W are underlined, and the words of W are highlighted in grey.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 341,
"end": 349,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "the same sentence. The mapping state s is observed after each action.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The initial mapping state",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "s 0 for document d is (E d , d, 0, \u2205); E d is the unique starting environment state for d. Performing action a in state s = (E, d, j, W ) leads to a new state s according to distribution p(s |s, a), defined as follows: E tran- sitions according to p(E |E, c, R), W",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "is updated with a's selected words, and j is incremented if all words of the sentence have been mapped. For the applications we consider in this work, environment state transitions, and consequently mapping state transitions, are deterministic.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Training During training, we are provided with a set D of documents, the ability to sample from the transition distribution, and a reward function r(h). Here, h = (s 0 , a 0 , . . . , s n\u22121 , a n\u22121 , s n ) is a history of states and actions visited while interpreting one document. r(h) outputs a realvalued score that correlates with correct action selection. 3 We consider both immediate reward, which is available after each action, and delayed reward, which does not provide feedback until the last action. For example, task completion is a delayed reward that produces a positive value after the final action only if the task was completed successfully. We will also demonstrate how manually annotated action sequences can be incorporated into the reward.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 361,
"end": 362,
"text": "3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The goal of training is to estimate parameters \u03b8 of the action selection distribution p(a|s, \u03b8), called the policy. Since the reward correlates with action sequence correctness, the \u03b8 that maximizes expected reward will yield the best actions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Problem Formulation",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Our goal is to predict a sequence of actions. We construct this sequence by repeatedly choosing an action given the current mapping state, and applying that action to advance to a new state.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Log-Linear Model for Actions",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "Given a state s = (E, d, j, W ), the space of possible next actions is defined by enumerating subspans of unused words in the current sentence (i.e., subspans of the jth sentence of d not in W ), and the possible commands and parameters in environment state E. 4 We model the policy distribution p(a|s; \u03b8) over this action space in a log-linear fashion (Della Pietra et al., 1997; Lafferty et al., 2001) , giving us the flexibility to incorporate a diverse range of features. Under this representation, the policy distribution is:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 261,
"end": 262,
"text": "4",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 353,
"end": 380,
"text": "(Della Pietra et al., 1997;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 381,
"end": 403,
"text": "Lafferty et al., 2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Log-Linear Model for Actions",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "p(a|s; \u03b8) = e \u03b8\u2022\u03c6(s,a) a e \u03b8\u2022\u03c6(s,a ) ,",
"eq_num": "(1)"
}
],
"section": "A Log-Linear Model for Actions",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "where \u03c6(s, a) \u2208 R n is an n-dimensional feature representation. During test, actions are selected according to the mode of this distribution.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Log-Linear Model for Actions",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "During training, our goal is to find the optimal policy p(a|s; \u03b8). Since reward correlates with correct action selection, a natural objective is to maximize expected future reward -that is, the reward we expect while acting according to that policy from state s. Formally, we maximize the value function:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reinforcement Learning",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "V \u03b8 (s) = E p(h|\u03b8) [r(h)] ,",
"eq_num": "(2)"
}
],
"section": "Reinforcement Learning",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "where the history h is the sequence of states and actions encountered while interpreting a single document d \u2208 D. This expectation is averaged over all documents in D. The distribution p(h|\u03b8) returns the probability of seeing history h when starting from state s and acting according to a policy with parameters \u03b8. This distribution can be decomposed into a product over time steps:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reinforcement Learning",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "p(h|\u03b8) = n\u22121 t=0 p(a t |s t ; \u03b8)p(s t+1 |s t , a t ).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reinforcement Learning",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "(3)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reinforcement Learning",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Our reinforcement learning problem is to find the parameters \u03b8 that maximize V \u03b8 from equation 2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Although there is no closed form solution, policy gradient algorithms (Sutton et al., 2000) estimate the parameters \u03b8 by performing stochastic gradient ascent. The gradient of V \u03b8 is approximated by interacting with the environment, and the resulting reward is used to update the estimate of \u03b8. Policy gradient algorithms optimize a non-convex objective and are only guaranteed to find a local optimum. However, as we will see, they scale to large state spaces and can perform well in practice. To find the parameters \u03b8 that maximize the objective, we first compute the derivative of V \u03b8 . Expanding according to the product rule, we have:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 70,
"end": 91,
"text": "(Sutton et al., 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "\u2202 \u2202\u03b8 V \u03b8 (s) = E p(h|\u03b8) r(h) t \u2202 \u2202\u03b8 log p(a t |s t ; \u03b8) ,",
"eq_num": "(4)"
}
],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "where the inner sum is over all time steps t in the current history h. Expanding the inner partial derivative we observe that:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "\u2202 \u2202\u03b8 log p(a|s; \u03b8) = \u03c6(s, a)\u2212 a \u03c6(s, a )p(a |s; \u03b8),",
"eq_num": "(5)"
}
],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "which is the derivative of a log-linear distribution.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Equation 5 is easy to compute directly. However, the complete derivative of V \u03b8 in equation 4 s0, a0, . . . , an\u22121, sn) as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 94,
"end": 103,
"text": "s0, a0, .",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "for i = 1 . . . T do 1 foreach d \u2208 D do 2 Sample history h \u223c p(h|\u03b8) where 3 h = (",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "3a for t = 0 . . . n \u2212 1 do 3b Sample action at \u223c p(a|st; \u03b8) 3c",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Execute at on state st: st+1 \u223c p(s|st, at) end is intractable, because computing the expectation would require summing over all possible histories. Instead, policy gradient algorithms employ stochastic gradient ascent by computing a noisy estimate of the expectation using just a subset of the histories. Specifically, we draw samples from p(h|\u03b8) by acting in the target environment, and use these samples to approximate the expectation in equation 4. In practice, it is often sufficient to sample a single history h for this approximation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "\u2206 \u2190 P t`\u03c6 (st, at) \u2212 P a \u03c6(st, a )p(a |st; \u03b8)4 \u03b8 \u2190 \u03b8 + r(h)\u2206",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Algorithm 1 details the complete policy gradient algorithm. It performs T iterations over the set of documents D.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Step 3 samples a history that maps each document to actions. This is done by repeatedly selecting actions according to the current policy, and updating the state by executing the selected actions. Steps 4 and 5 compute the empirical gradient and update the parameters \u03b8.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "In many domains, interacting with the environment is expensive. Therefore, we use two techniques that allow us to take maximum advantage of each environment interaction. First, a history h = (s 0 , a 0 , . . . , s n ) contains subsequences (s i , a i , . . . s n ) for i = 1 to n \u2212 1, each with its own reward value given by the environment as a side effect of executing h. We apply the update from equation 5 for each subsequence. Second, for a sampled history h, we can propose alternative histories h that result in the same commands and parameters with different word spans. We can again apply equation 5 for each h , weighted by its probability under the current policy, p(h |\u03b8) p(h|\u03b8) .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "The algorithm we have presented belongs to a family of policy gradient algorithms that have been successfully used for complex tasks such as robot control (Ng et al., 2003) . Our formulation is unique in how it represents natural language in the reinforcement learning framework.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 155,
"end": 172,
"text": "(Ng et al., 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Policy Gradient Algorithm",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "We can design a range of reward functions to guide learning, depending on the availability of annotated data and environment feedback. Consider the case when every training document d \u2208 D is annotated with its correct sequence of actions, and state transitions are deterministic. Given these examples, it is straightforward to construct a reward function that connects policy gradient to maximum likelihood. Specifically, define a reward function r(h) that returns one when h matches the annotation for the document being analyzed, and zero otherwise. Policy gradient performs stochastic gradient ascent on the objective from equation 2, performing one update per document. For document d, this objective becomes:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reward Functions and ML Estimation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "E p(h|\u03b8) [r(h)] = h r(h)p(h|\u03b8) = p(h d |\u03b8),",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reward Functions and ML Estimation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "where h d is the history corresponding to the annotated action sequence. Thus, with this reward policy gradient is equivalent to stochastic gradient ascent with a maximum likelihood objective.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reward Functions and ML Estimation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "At the other extreme, when annotations are completely unavailable, learning is still possible given informative feedback from the environment. Crucially, this feedback only needs to correlate with action sequence quality. We detail environment-based reward functions in the next section. As our results will show, reward functions built using this kind of feedback can provide strong guidance for learning. We will also consider reward functions that combine annotated supervision with environment feedback.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Reward Functions and ML Estimation",
"sec_num": "5.2"
},
{
"text": "We study two applications of our model: following instructions to perform software tasks, and solving a puzzle game using tutorial guides.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applying the Model",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "On its Help and Support website, 5 Microsoft publishes a number of articles describing how to per-5 support.microsoft.com form tasks and troubleshoot problems in the Windows operating systems. Examples of such tasks include installing patches and changing security settings. Figure 1 shows one such article.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 275,
"end": 283,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Microsoft Windows Help and Support",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "Our goal is to automatically execute these support articles in the Windows 2000 environment. Here, the environment state is the set of visible user interface (UI) objects, and object properties such as label, location, and parent window. Possible commands include left-click, right-click, double-click, and type-into, all of which take a UI object as a parameter; type-into additionally requires a parameter for the input text. Table 1 lists some of the features we use for this domain. These features capture various aspects of the action under consideration, the current Windows UI state, and the input instructions. For example, one lexical feature measures the similarity of a word in the sentence to the UI labels of objects in the environment. Environment-specific features, such as whether an object is currently in focus, are useful when selecting the object to manipulate. In total, there are 4,438 features.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 428,
"end": 435,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Microsoft Windows Help and Support",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "Reward Function Environment feedback can be used as a reward function in this domain. An obvious reward would be task completion (e.g., whether the stated computer problem was fixed). Unfortunately, verifying task completion is a challenging system issue in its own right.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Microsoft Windows Help and Support",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "Instead, we rely on a noisy method of checking whether execution can proceed from one sentence to the next: at least one word in each sentence has to correspond to an object in the envi- If no words in a sentence match a current environment object, then one of the previous sentences was analyzed incorrectly. In this case, we assign the history a reward of -1. This reward is not guaranteed to penalize all incorrect histories, because there may be false positive matches between the sentence and the environment. When at least one word matches, we assign a positive reward that linearly increases with the percentage of words assigned to non-null commands, and linearly decreases with the number of output actions. This reward signal encourages analyses that interpret all of the words without producing spurious actions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Microsoft Windows Help and Support",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "Our second application is to a puzzle game called Crossblock, available online as a Flash game. 7 Each of 50 puzzles is played on a grid, where some grid positions are filled with squares. The object of the game is to clear the grid by drawing vertical or horizontal line segments that remove groups of squares. Each segment must exactly cross a specific number of squares, ranging from two to seven depending on the puzzle. Humans players have found this game challenging and engaging enough to warrant posting textual tutorials. 8 A sample puzzle and tutorial are shown in Figure 3 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 575,
"end": 583,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Crossblock: A Puzzle Game",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "The environment is defined by the state of the grid. The only command is clear, which takes a parameter specifying the orientation (row or column) and grid location of the line segment to be removed. The challenge in this domain is to segment the text into the phrases describing each action, and then correctly identify the line segments from references such as \"the bottom four from the second column from the left.\"",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Crossblock: A Puzzle Game",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "For this domain, we use two sets of binary features on state-action pairs (s, a). First, for each vocabulary word w, we define a feature that is one if w is the last word of a's consumed words W . These features help identify the proper text segmentation points between actions. Second, we introduce features for pairs of vocabulary word w and attributes of action a, e.g., the line orientation and grid locations of the squares that a would remove. This set of features enables us to match words (e.g., \"row\") with objects in the environment (e.g., a move that removes a horizontal series of squares). In total, there are 8,094 features.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Crossblock: A Puzzle Game",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "Reward Function For Crossblock it is easy to directly verify task completion, which we use as the basis of our reward function. The reward r(h) is -1 if h ends in a state where the puzzle cannot be completed. For solved puzzles, the reward is a positive value proportional to the percentage of words assigned to non-null commands.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Crossblock: A Puzzle Game",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "Datasets For the Windows domain, our dataset consists of 128 documents, divided into 70 for training, 18 for development, and 40 for test. In the puzzle game domain, we use 50 tutorials, divided into 40 for training and 10 for test. 9 Statistics for the datasets are shown below. The data exhibits certain qualities that make for a challenging learning problem. For instance, there are a surprising variety of linguistic constructs -as Figure 4 shows, in the Windows domain even a simple command is expressed in at least six different ways. Experimental Framework To apply our algorithm to the Windows domain, we use the Win32 application programming interface to simulate human interactions with the user interface, and to gather environment state information. The operating system environment is hosted within a virtual machine, 10 allowing us to rapidly save and reset system state snapshots. For the puzzle game domain, we replicated the game with an implementation that facilitates automatic play.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 436,
"end": 444,
"text": "Figure 4",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "As is commonly done in reinforcement learning, we use a softmax temperature parameter to smooth the policy distribution (Sutton and Barto, 1998) , set to 0.1 in our experiments. For Windows, the development set is used to select the best parameters. For Crossblock, we choose the parameters that produce the highest reward during training. During evaluation, we use these parameters to predict mappings for the test documents.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 120,
"end": 144,
"text": "(Sutton and Barto, 1998)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Evaluation Metrics For evaluation, we compare the results to manually constructed sequences of actions. We measure the number of correct actions, sentences, and documents. An action is correct if it matches the annotations in terms of command and parameters. A sentence is correct if all of its actions are correctly identified, and analogously for documents. 11 Statistical significance is measured with the sign test.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Additionally, we compute a word alignment score to investigate the extent to which the input text is used to construct correct analyses. This score measures the percentage of words that are aligned to the corresponding annotated actions in correctly analyzed documents.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Baselines We consider the following baselines to characterize the performance of our approach.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Full Supervision Sequence prediction problems like ours are typically addressed using supervised techniques. We measure how a standard supervised approach would perform on this task by using a reward signal based on manual annotations of output action sequences, as defined in Section 5.2. As shown there, policy gradient with this reward is equivalent to stochastic gradient ascent with a maximum likelihood objective.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Partial Supervision We consider the case when only a subset of training documents is annotated, and environment reward is used for the remainder. Our method seamlessly combines these two kinds of rewards.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Random and Majority (Windows) We consider two na\u00efve baselines. Both scan through each sentence from left to right. A command c is executed on the object whose name is encountered first in the sentence. This command c is either selected randomly, or set to the majority command, which is leftclick. This procedure is repeated until no more words match environment objects.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Random (Puzzle) We consider a baseline that randomly selects among the actions that are valid in the current game state. 12 Table 2 presents evaluation results on the test sets. There are several indicators of the difficulty of this task. The random and majority baselines' poor performance in both domains indicates that na\u00efve approaches are inadequate for these tasks. The performance of the fully supervised approach provides further evidence that the task is challenging. This difficulty can be attributed in part to the large branching factor of possible actions at each stepon average, there are 27.14 choices per action in the Windows domain, and 9.78 in the Crossblock domain.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 126,
"end": 133,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Setup",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "In both domains, the learners relying only on environment reward perform well. Although the fully supervised approach performs the best, adding just a few annotated training examples to the environment-based learner significantly reduces the performance gap. Table 2 : Performance on the test set with different reward signals and baselines. Our evaluation measures the proportion of correct actions, sentences, and documents. We also report the percentage of correct word alignments for the successfully completed documents. Note the puzzle domain has only singlesentence documents, so its sentence and document scores are identical. The partial supervision line refers to 20 out of 70 annotated training documents for Windows, and 10 out of 40 for the puzzle. Each result marked with * or is a statistically significant improvement over the result immediately above it; * indicates p < 0.01 and indicates p < 0.05. Figure 5 : Comparison of two training scenarios where training is done using a subset of annotated documents, with and without environment reward for the remaining unannotated documents. Figure 5 shows the overall tradeoff between annotation effort and system performance for the two domains. The ability to make this tradeoff is one of the advantages of our approach. The figure also shows that augmenting annotated documents with additional environment-reward documents invariably improves performance.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 259,
"end": 266,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 917,
"end": 925,
"text": "Figure 5",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1104,
"end": 1112,
"text": "Figure 5",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Results",
"sec_num": "8"
},
{
"text": "The word alignment results from Table 2 indicate that the learners are mapping the correct words to actions for documents that are successfully completed. For example, the models that perform best in the Windows domain achieve nearly perfect word alignment scores.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 32,
"end": 39,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Results",
"sec_num": "8"
},
{
"text": "To further assess the contribution of the instruction text, we train a variant of our model without access to text features. This is possible in the game domain, where all of the puzzles share a single goal state that is independent of the instructions. This variant solves 34% of the puzzles, suggesting that access to the instructions significantly improves performance.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Results",
"sec_num": "8"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we presented a reinforcement learning approach for inducing a mapping between instructions and actions. This approach is able to use environment-based rewards, such as task completion, to learn to analyze text. We showed that having access to a suitable reward function can significantly reduce the need for annotations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "9"
},
{
"text": "Code, data, and annotations used in this work are available at http://groups.csail.mit.edu/rbg/code/rl/",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "That is, action ai is executed before ai+1 is predicted.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In most reinforcement learning problems, the reward function is defined over state-action pairs, as r(s, a) -in this case, r(h) = P t r(st, at), and our formulation becomes a standard finite-horizon Markov decision process. Policy gradient approaches allow us to learn using the more general case of history-based reward.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For parameters that refer to words, the space of possible values is defined by the unused words in the current sentence.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We assume that a word maps to an environment object if the edit distance between the word and the object's name is below a threshold value. 7 hexaditidom.deviantart.com/art/Crossblock-108669149 8 www.jayisgames.com/archives/2009/01/crossblock.php",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For Crossblock, because the number of puzzles is limited, we did not hold out a separate development set, and report averaged results over five training/test splits.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "VMware Workstation, available at www.vmware.com 11 In these tasks, each action depends on the correct execution of all previous actions, so a single error can render the remainder of that document's mapping incorrect. In addition, due to variability in document lengths, overall action accuracy is not guaranteed to be higher than document accuracy.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Since action selection is among objects, there is no natural majority baseline for the puzzle.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "The authors acknowledge the support of the NSF (CAREER grant IIS-0448168, grant IIS-0835445, grant IIS-0835652, and a Graduate Research Fellowship) and the ONR. Thanks to Michael Collins, Amir Globerson, Tommi Jaakkola, Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Dina Katabi, Martin Rinard, and members of the MIT NLP group for their suggestions and comments. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgments",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Learning the semantics of words and pictures",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kobus",
"middle": [],
"last": "Barnard",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Forsyth",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proceedings of ICCV",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kobus Barnard and David A. Forsyth. 2001. Learning the semantics of words and pictures. In Proceedings of ICCV.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "Learning to sportscast: a test of grounded language acquisition",
"authors": [
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "David",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Raymond",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mooney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of ICML",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "David L. Chen and Raymond J. Mooney. 2008. Learn- ing to sportscast: a test of grounded language acqui- sition. In Proceedings of ICML.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Inducing features of random fields",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Vincent",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Stephen Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lafferty",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1997,
"venue": "IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell",
"volume": "19",
"issue": "4",
"pages": "380--393",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Stephen Della Pietra, Vincent J. Della Pietra, and John D. Lafferty. 1997. Inducing features of ran- dom fields. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 19(4):380-393.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Understanding natural language instructions: the case of purpose clauses",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Barbara",
"middle": [],
"last": "Di",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Eugenio",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1992,
"venue": "Proceedings of ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Barbara Di Eugenio. 1992. Understanding natural lan- guage instructions: the case of purpose clauses. In Proceedings of ACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Intentional context in situated language learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fleischman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Deb",
"middle": [],
"last": "Roy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Proceedings of CoNLL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Michael Fleischman and Deb Roy. 2005. Intentional context in situated language learning. In Proceed- ings of CoNLL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data",
"authors": [
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lafferty",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Andrew",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mccallum",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Fernando",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pereira",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proceedings of ICML",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "John Lafferty, Andrew McCallum, and Fernando Pereira. 2001. Conditional random fields: Prob- abilistic models for segmenting and labeling se- quence data. In Proceedings of ICML.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Automatic optimization of dialogue management",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Diane",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Litman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Kearns",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Satinder",
"middle": [],
"last": "Singh",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Marilyn",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Walker",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proceedings of COLING",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Diane J. Litman, Michael S. Kearns, Satinder Singh, and Marilyn A. Walker. 2000. Automatic optimiza- tion of dialogue management. In Proceedings of COLING.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Learning language from its perceptual context",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Raymond",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Mooney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of ECML/PKDD",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Raymond J. Mooney. 2008a. Learning language from its perceptual context. In Proceedings of ECML/PKDD.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Learning to connect language and perception",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Raymond",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Mooney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of AAAI",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Raymond J. Mooney. 2008b. Learning to connect lan- guage and perception. In Proceedings of AAAI.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Autonomous helicopter flight via reinforcement learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Andrew",
"middle": [
"Y"
],
"last": "Ng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [
"Jin"
],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [
"I"
],
"last": "Jordan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Shankar",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sastry",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "Advances in NIPS",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Andrew Y. Ng, H. Jin Kim, Michael I. Jordan, and Shankar Sastry. 2003. Autonomous helicopter flight via reinforcement learning. In Advances in NIPS.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Grounding knowledge in sensors: Unsupervised learning for language and planning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "James Timothy",
"middle": [],
"last": "Oates",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "James Timothy Oates. 2001. Grounding knowledge in sensors: Unsupervised learning for language and planning. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Learning words from sights and sounds: a computational model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Deb",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Roy",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alex",
"middle": [
"P"
],
"last": "Pentland",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Cognitive Science",
"volume": "26",
"issue": "",
"pages": "113--146",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Deb K. Roy and Alex P. Pentland. 2002. Learn- ing words from sights and sounds: a computational model. Cognitive Science 26, pages 113-146.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Spoken dialogue management using probabilistic reasoning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nicholas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Roy",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Joelle",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pineau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sebastian",
"middle": [],
"last": "Thrun",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proceedings of ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Nicholas Roy, Joelle Pineau, and Sebastian Thrun. 2000. Spoken dialogue management using proba- bilistic reasoning. In Proceedings of ACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Automatic learning of dialogue strategy using dialogue simulation and reinforcement learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Konrad",
"middle": [],
"last": "Scheffler",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Steve",
"middle": [],
"last": "Young",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceedings of HLT",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Konrad Scheffler and Steve Young. 2002. Automatic learning of dialogue strategy using dialogue simula- tion and reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of HLT.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "Reinforcement learning for spoken dialogue systems",
"authors": [
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Satinder",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Singh",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Diane",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Kearns",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Marilyn",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Litman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Walker",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1999,
"venue": "Advances in NIPS",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Satinder P. Singh, Michael J. Kearns, Diane J. Litman, and Marilyn A. Walker. 1999. Reinforcement learn- ing for spoken dialogue systems. In Advances in NIPS.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Grounding the lexical semantics of verbs in visual perception using force dynamics and event logic",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jeffrey",
"middle": [
"Mark"
],
"last": "Siskind",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR)",
"volume": "15",
"issue": "",
"pages": "31--90",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jeffrey Mark Siskind. 2001. Grounding the lexical se- mantics of verbs in visual perception using force dy- namics and event logic. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR), 15:31-90.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Sutton",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Andrew",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Barto",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1998,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. 1998. Re- inforcement Learning: An Introduction. The MIT Press.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Policy gradient methods for reinforcement learning with function approximation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Sutton",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mcallester",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Satinder",
"middle": [],
"last": "Singh",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Yishay",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mansour",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Advances in NIPS",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Richard S. Sutton, David McAllester, Satinder Singh, and Yishay Mansour. 2000. Policy gradient meth- ods for reinforcement learning with function approx- imation. In Advances in NIPS.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Understanding Natural Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Terry",
"middle": [],
"last": "Winograd",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1972,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Terry Winograd. 1972. Understanding Natural Lan- guage. Academic Press.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "On the integration of grounding language and learning objects",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Chen",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dana",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Ballard",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proceedings of AAAI",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chen Yu and Dana H. Ballard. 2004. On the integra- tion of grounding language and learning objects. In Proceedings of AAAI.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Input: A document set D, Feature representation \u03c6, Reward function r(h), Number of iterations T Initialization: Set \u03b8 to small random values.",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF1": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Estimate of parameters \u03b8Algorithm 1: A policy gradient algorithm.",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF2": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "an environment object L Set of object class names (e.g. \"button\") V Vocabulary Features on W and object o Test if o is visible in s Test if o has input focus Test if o is in the foreground Test if o was previously interacted with Test if o came into existence since last action Min. edit distance between w \u2208 W and object labels in sFeatures on words in W , command c, and object o \u2200c \u2208 C, w \u2208 V : test if c = c and w \u2208 W \u2200c \u2208 C, l \u2208 L: test if c = c and l is the class of o",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF3": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Crossblock puzzle with tutorial. For this level, four squares in a row or column must be removed at once. The first move specified by the tutorial is greyed in the puzzle.ronment. 6 For instance, in the sentence from Figure 2 the word \"Run\" matches the Run... menu item.",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF4": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Variations of \"click internet options on the tools menu\" present in the Windows corpus.",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"TABREF0": {
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table/>",
"text": "Example features in the Windows domain. All features are binary, except for the normalized edit distance which is real-valued.",
"html": null
},
"TABREF2": {
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td colspan=\"2\">Windows</td><td/><td/><td>Puzzle</td><td/></tr><tr><td/><td>Action</td><td>Sent.</td><td>Doc.</td><td colspan=\"2\">Word Action</td><td>Doc.</td><td>Word</td></tr><tr><td>Random baseline</td><td>0.128</td><td>0.101</td><td>0.000</td><td>--</td><td>0.081</td><td>0.111</td><td>--</td></tr><tr><td>Majority baseline</td><td>0.287</td><td>0.197</td><td>0.100</td><td>--</td><td>--</td><td>--</td><td>--</td></tr><tr><td>Partial supervision</td><td colspan=\"2\">0.723 * 0.702</td><td colspan=\"2\">0.475 0.989</td><td colspan=\"3\">0.575 * 0.523 0.850</td></tr><tr><td>Full supervision</td><td>0.756</td><td>0.714</td><td colspan=\"2\">0.525 0.991</td><td>0.632</td><td colspan=\"2\">0.630 0.869</td></tr></table>",
"text": "Environment reward * 0.647 * 0.590 * 0.375 0.819 * 0.428 * 0.453 0.686",
"html": null
}
}
}
} |