Explainable Reinforcement Learning for Transparent Automation
-
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67228/30713315/IJAIDT-2020PII7P6ZPublished 08-05-2020
Reinforcement Learning, Explainable AI, Transparent Automation, Policy Interpretation, Trustworthy Systems, Decision-Making Models, Human-AI Interaction Issue
Section
ArticlesHow to Cite
[1]M. Anderson and D. Thompson, “Explainable Reinforcement Learning for Transparent Automation”, IJAIDT, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 01–13, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.67228/30713315/IJAIDT-2020PII7P6Z.Abstract
Reinforcement Learning (RL) is widely used for solving sequential decision-making problems, enabling agents to learn optimal actions through interaction with dynamic environments. However, many RL models function as “black boxes,” making their decisions difficult to interpret—an issue that is especially critical in safety-sensitive domains like healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems. Explainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL) addresses this challenge by providing human-understandable insights into agent behavior, policy decisions, and reward structures. This work reviews pre-2019 XRL approaches, categorizing them into policy explanation, reward decomposition, model transparency, and post-hoc interpretability methods. It highlights the trade-off between performance and interpretability, particularly in complex, high-dimensional environments. A framework is proposed that combines interpretable policies, surrogate models, attention mechanisms, and visualization techniques to enhance transparency without significantly reducing performance. Evaluation metrics such as fidelity, comprehensibility, and consistency are used to assess explanation quality. The analysis shows that hybrid approaches—combining inherent interpretability with post-hoc explanations—offer the best balance between accuracy and transparency. Overall, XRL is essential for building trust in automated systems, with future research focusing on standardized evaluation methods and human-in-the-loop learning.
References
[1] M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin, “Why Should I Trust You? Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier,” Proc. 22nd ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2016.
[2] S. M. Lundberg and S.-I. Lee, “A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2017.
[3] D. P. Kingma and M. Welling, “Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes,” International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2014.
[4] F. Doshi-Velez and B. Kim, “Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608, 2017.
[5] D. Silver et al., “Mastering the Game of Go with Deep Neural Networks and Tree Search,” Nature, vol. 529, no. 7587, pp. 484–489, 2016.
[6] W. Samek, T. Wiegand, and K.-R. Müller, “Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Understanding, Visualizing and Interpreting Deep Learning Models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.08296, 2017.
[7] J. Hein, C. Andriushchenko, and M. Bitterwolf, “Why ReLU Networks Yield High-Confidence Predictions Far Away from the Training Data,” Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2019.
[8] R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto, “Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction,” 2nd ed., MIT Press, 2018.
[9] A. Annasamy and B. Sycara, “Towards Better Interpretability in Deep Q-Networks,” AAAI Workshop on Explainable Artificial Intelligence, 2019.
[10] J. Gilpin et al., “Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning,” IEEE 5th Int. Conf. Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA), 2018.
[11] Z. Zahavy, A. Ben-Zrihem, and S. Mannor, “Graying the Black Box: Understanding DQNs,” International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2016.
Downloads
How to Cite
[1]M. Anderson and D. Thompson, “Explainable Reinforcement Learning for Transparent Automation”, IJAIDT, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 01–13, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.67228/30713315/IJAIDT-2020PII7P6Z.