Enhancing Safety in Learning from Demonstration Algorithms via Control Barrier Function Shielding
Authors
Learning from Demonstration (LfD) is a powerful method for non-roboticists end-users to teach robots new tasks, enabling them to customize the robot behavior. However, modern LfD techniques do not explicitly synthesize safe robot behavior, which limits the deployability of these approaches in the real world. To enforce safety in LfD without relying on experts, we propose a new framework, ShiElding with Control barrier fUnctions in inverse REinforcement learning (SECURE), which learns a customized Control Barrier Function (CBF) from end-users that prevents robots from taking unsafe actions while imposing little interference with the task completion. We evaluate SECURE in three sets of experiments. First, we empirically validate SECURE learns a high-quality CBF from demonstrations and outperforms conventional LfD methods on simulated robotic and autonomous driving tasks with improvements on safety by up to 100%. Second, we demonstrate that roboticists can leverage SECURE to outperform conventional LfD approaches on a real-world knife-cutting, meal-preparation task by 12.5% in task completion while driving the number of safety violations to zero. Finally, we demonstrate in a user study that non-roboticists can use SECURE to effectively teach the robot safe policies that avoid collisions with the person and prevent coffee from spilling.
Research Questions / Practical Problems
Question signals indexed for this paper.
- 83%
"Should I Rely on You or the AI?" Leaders' Trust and Perceptions in Mixed Human-AI Teams
CHI '26· Human-Robot Collaboration (HRC) +2
- 80%
Matching Mind and Method: Augmented Decision-Making with Digital Companions based on Regulatory Mode Theory
CHI '23· AI-Assisted Decision-Making & Automation
- 80%
Online Behavior Modification for Expressive User Control of RL-Trained Robots
HRI '24· AI-Assisted Decision-Making & Automation +1
- 80%
Aligning Human and Robot Representations
HRI '24· AI-Assisted Decision-Making & Automation +1
- 67%
Competent but Rigid: Identifying the Gap in Empowering AI to Participate Equally in Group Decision-Making
CHI '23· Human-LLM Collaboration +1
- 67%
Why Johnny Can’t Prompt: How Non-AI Experts Try (and Fail) to Design LLM Prompts
CHI '23· Human-LLM Collaboration +1
- 67%
"Are You Really Sure?'' Understanding the Effects of Human Self-Confidence Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Making
CHI '24· Explainable AI (XAI) +1
- 67%
Automatic Macro Mining from Interaction Traces at Scale
CHI '24· Human-LLM Collaboration +1
- 67%
REX: Designing User-centered Repair and Explanations to Address Robot Failures
DIS '24· Explainable AI (XAI) +2
- 67%
Do I Trust My Machine Teammate? An Investigation from Perception to Decision
IUI '19· Explainable AI (XAI) +2
Based on Jaccard similarity of research subtopics & professions (≥60%)