Deep neural networks (DNNs) are currently widely used for many artificial intelligence (AI) applications including computer vision, speech recognition, and robotics. While DNNs deliver state-of-the-art accuracy on many AI tasks, it comes at the cost of high computational complexity. Accordingly, techniques that enable efficient processing of DNNs to improve energy efficiency and throughput without sacrificing application accuracy or increasing hardware cost are critical to the wide deployment of DNNs in AI systems. This article aims to provide a comprehensive tutorial and survey about the recent advances toward the goal of enabling efficient processing of DNNs. Specifically, it will provide an overview of DNNs, discuss various hardware platforms and architectures that support DNNs, and highlight key trends in reducing the computation cost of DNNs either solely via hardware design changes or via joint hardware design and DNN algorithm changes. It will also summarize various development resources that enable researchers and practitioners to quickly get started in this field, and highlight important benchmarking metrics and design considerations that should be used for evaluating the rapidly growing number of DNN hardware designs, optionally including algorithmic codesigns, being proposed in academia and industry. The reader will take away the following concepts from this article: understand the key design considerations for DNNs; be able to evaluate different DNN hardware implementations with benchmarks and comparison metrics; understand the tradeoffs between various hardware architectures and platforms; be able to evaluate the utility of various DNN design techniques for efficient processing; and understand recent implementation trends and opportunities.

Efficient Processing of Deep Neural Networks: A Tutorial and Survey

Artificial intelligence (AI) has undergone a renaissance recently, making major progress in key domains such as vision, language, control, and decision-making. This has been due, in part, to cheap data and cheap compute resources, which have fit the natural strengths of deep learning. However, many defining characteristics of human intelligence, which developed under much different pressures, remain out of reach for current approaches. In particular, generalizing beyond one's experiences--a hallmark of human intelligence from infancy--remains a formidable challenge for modern AI. 
The following is part position paper, part review, and part unification. We argue that combinatorial generalization must be a top priority for AI to achieve human-like abilities, and that structured representations and computations are key to realizing this objective. Just as biology uses nature and nurture cooperatively, we reject the false choice between "hand-engineering" and "end-to-end" learning, and instead advocate for an approach which benefits from their complementary strengths. We explore how using relational inductive biases within deep learning architectures can facilitate learning about entities, relations, and rules for composing them. We present a new building block for the AI toolkit with a strong relational inductive bias--the graph network--which generalizes and extends various approaches for neural networks that operate on graphs, and provides a straightforward interface for manipulating structured knowledge and producing structured behaviors. We discuss how graph networks can support relational reasoning and combinatorial generalization, laying the foundation for more sophisticated, interpretable, and flexible patterns of reasoning. As a companion to this paper, we have released an open-source software library for building graph networks, with demonstrations of how to use them in practice.

Relational inductive biases, deep learning, and graph networks

We give an overview of recent exciting achievements of deep reinforcement learning (RL). We discuss six core elements, six important mechanisms, and twelve applications. We start with background of machine learning, deep learning and reinforcement learning. Next we discuss core RL elements, including value function, in particular, Deep Q-Network (DQN), policy, reward, model, planning, and exploration. After that, we discuss important mechanisms for RL, including attention and memory, unsupervised learning, transfer learning, multi-agent RL, hierarchical RL, and learning to learn. Then we discuss various applications of RL, including games, in particular, AlphaGo, robotics, natural language processing, including dialogue systems, machine translation, and text generation, computer vision, neural architecture design, business management, finance, healthcare, Industry 4.0, smart grid, intelligent transportation systems, and computer systems. We mention topics not reviewed yet, and list a collection of RL resources. After presenting a brief summary, we close with discussions. 
Please see Deep Reinforcement Learning, arXiv:1810.06339, for a significant update.

Deep Reinforcement Learning: An Overview

For many applications of reinforcement learning it can be more convenient to specify both a reward function and constraints, rather than trying to design behavior through the reward function. For example, systems that physically interact with or around humans should satisfy safety constraints. Recent advances in policy search algorithms (Mnih et al., 2016; Schulman et al., 2015; Lillicrap et al., 2016; Levine et al., 2016) have enabled new capabilities in high-dimensional control, but do not consider the constrained setting. We propose Constrained Policy Optimization (CPO), the first general-purpose policy search algorithm for constrained reinforcement learning with guarantees for near-constraint satisfaction at each iteration. Our method allows us to train neural network policies for high-dimensional control while making guarantees about policy behavior all throughout training. Our guarantees are based on a new theoretical result, which is of independent interest: we prove a bound relating the expected returns of two policies to an average divergence between them. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach on simulated robot locomotion tasks where the agent must satisfy constraints motivated by safety.

/pdf/constrained-policy-optimization-51ib7vuwki.pdf

Constrained policy optimization

With the development of deep representation learning, the domain of reinforcement learning (RL) has become a powerful learning framework now capable of learning complex policies in high dimensional environments. This review summarises deep reinforcement learning (DRL) algorithms and provides a taxonomy of automated driving tasks where (D)RL methods have been employed, while addressing key computational challenges in real world deployment of autonomous driving agents. It also delineates adjacent domains such as behavior cloning, imitation learning, inverse reinforcement learning that are related but are not classical RL algorithms. The role of simulators in training agents, methods to validate, test and robustify existing solutions in RL are discussed.

Deep Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Driving: A Survey

Autonomous driving is a multi-agent setting where the host vehicle must apply sophisticated negotiation skills with other road users when overtaking, giving way, merging, taking left and right turns and while pushing ahead in unstructured urban roadways. Since there are many possible scenarios, manually tackling all possible cases will likely yield a too simplistic policy. Moreover, one must balance between unexpected behavior of other drivers/pedestrians and at the same time not to be too defensive so that normal traffic flow is maintained. 
In this paper we apply deep reinforcement learning to the problem of forming long term driving strategies. We note that there are two major challenges that make autonomous driving different from other robotic tasks. First, is the necessity for ensuring functional safety - something that machine learning has difficulty with given that performance is optimized at the level of an expectation over many instances. Second, the Markov Decision Process model often used in robotics is problematic in our case because of unpredictable behavior of other agents in this multi-agent scenario. We make three contributions in our work. First, we show how policy gradient iterations can be used without Markovian assumptions. Second, we decompose the problem into a composition of a Policy for Desires (which is to be learned) and trajectory planning with hard constraints (which is not learned). The goal of Desires is to enable comfort of driving, while hard constraints guarantees the safety of driving. Third, we introduce a hierarchical temporal abstraction we call an "Option Graph" with a gating mechanism that significantly reduces the effective horizon and thereby reducing the variance of the gradient estimation even further.

Safe, Multi-Agent, Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Driving

In recent years, car makers and tech companies have been racing towards self driving cars. It seems that the main parameter in this race is who will have the first car on the road. The goal of this paper is to add to the equation two additional crucial parameters. The first is standardization of safety assurance --- what are the minimal requirements that every self-driving car must satisfy, and how can we verify these requirements. The second parameter is scalability --- engineering solutions that lead to unleashed costs will not scale to millions of cars, which will push interest in this field into a niche academic corner, and drive the entire field into a "winter of autonomous driving". In the first part of the paper we propose a white-box, interpretable, mathematical model for safety assurance, which we call Responsibility-Sensitive Safety (RSS). In the second part we describe a design of a system that adheres to our safety assurance requirements and is scalable to millions of cars.

On a Formal Model of Safe and Scalable Self-driving Cars

In recent years, Deep Learning has become the go-to solution for a broad range of applications, often outperforming state-of-the-art. However, it is important, for both theoreticians and practitioners, to gain a deeper understanding of the difficulties and limitations associated with common approaches and algorithms. We describe four types of simple problems, for which the gradient-based algorithms commonly used in deep learning either fail or suffer from significant difficulties. We illustrate the failures through practical experiments, and provide theoretical insights explaining their source, and how they might be remedied.

Failures of Gradient-Based Deep Learning

Systems and methods are provided for navigating an autonomous vehicle using reinforcement learning techniques In one implementation, a navigation system for a host vehicle may include at least one processing device programmed to: receive, from a camera, a plurality of images representative of an environment of the host vehicle; analyze the plurality of images to identify a navigational state associated with the host vehicle; provide the navigational state to a trained navigational system; receive, from the trained navigational system, a desired navigational action for execution by the host vehicle in response to the identified navigational state; analyze the desired navigational action relative to one or more predefined navigational constraints; determine an actual navigational action for the host vehicle, wherein the actual navigational action includes at least one modification of the desired navigational action determined based on the one or more predefined navigational constraints; and cause at least one adjustment of a navigational actuator of the host vehicle in response to the determined actual navigational action for the host vehicle

Machine learning navigational engine with imposed constraints

/pdf/failures-of-gradient-based-deep-learning-3lvoto0fcq.pdf

Shaked Shammah

Papers

Safe, Multi-Agent, Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Driving

On a Formal Model of Safe and Scalable Self-driving Cars

Failures of Gradient-Based Deep Learning

Machine learning navigational engine with imposed constraints

Failures of Gradient-Based Deep Learning