Author name cluster

Alan Chan

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

5 papers

1 author row

TMLR Journal 2025 Journal Article

Infrastructure for AI Agents

Alan Chan
Kevin Wei
Sihao Huang
Nitarshan Rajkumar
Elija Perrier
Seth Lazar
Gillian K Hadfield
Markus Anderljung

\textbf{AI agents} plan and execute interactions in open-ended environments. For example, OpenAI's Operator can use a web browser to do product comparisons and buy online goods. To facilitate beneficial interactions and mitigate harmful ones, much research focuses on directly modifying agent behaviour. For example, developers can train agents to follow user instructions. This focus on direct modifications is useful, but insufficient. We will also need external protocols and systems that shape how agents interact with institutions and other actors. For instance, agents will need more efficient protocols to communicate with each other and form agreements. In addition, attributing an agent's actions to a particular human or other legal entity can help to establish trust, and also disincentivize misuse. Given this motivation, we propose the concept of \textbf{agent infrastructure}: technical systems and shared protocols external to agents that are designed to mediate and influence their interactions with and impacts on their environments. Just as the Internet relies on protocols like HTTPS, our work argues that agent infrastructure will be similarly indispensable to ecosystems of agents. We identify three functions for agent infrastructure: 1) attributing actions, properties, and other information to specific agents, their users, or other actors; 2) shaping agents' interactions; and 3) detecting and remedying harmful actions from agents. We provide an incomplete catalog of research directions for such functions. For each direction, we include analysis of use cases, infrastructure adoption, relationships to existing (internet) infrastructure, limitations, and open questions. Making progress on agent infrastructure can prepare society for the adoption of more advanced agents.

PDF Details

TMLR Journal 2025 Journal Article

Open Problems in Technical AI Governance

Anka Reuel
Benjamin Bucknall
Stephen Casper
Timothy Fist
Lisa Soder
Onni Aarne
Lewis Hammond
Lujain Ibrahim

AI progress is creating a growing range of risks and opportunities, but it is often unclear how they should be navigated. In many cases, the barriers and uncertainties faced are at least partly technical. Technical AI governance, referring to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI, seeks to address such challenges. It can help to (a) identify areas where intervention is needed, (b) assess the efficacy of potential governance actions, and (c) enhance governance options by designing mechanisms for enforcement, incentivization, or compliance. In this paper, we explain what technical AI governance is, outline why it is important, and present a taxonomy and incomplete catalog of its open problems. This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.

PDF Details

TMLR Journal 2024 Journal Article

Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Models

Usman Anwar
Abulhair Saparov
Javier Rando
Daniel Paleka
Miles Turpin
Peter Hase
Ekdeep Singh Lubana
Erik Jenner

This work identifies 18 foundational challenges in assuring the alignment and safety of large language models (LLMs). These challenges are organized into three different categories: scientific understanding of LLMs, development and deployment methods, and sociotechnical challenges. Based on the identified challenges, we pose 200+, concrete research questions.

PDF Details

JMLR Journal 2022 Journal Article

Greedification Operators for Policy Optimization: Investigating Forward and Reverse KL Divergences

Alan Chan
Hugo Silva
Sungsu Lim
Tadashi Kozuno
A. Rupam Mahmood
Martha White

Approximate Policy Iteration (API) algorithms alternate between (approximate) policy evaluation and (approximate) greedification. Many different approaches have been explored for approximate policy evaluation, but less is understood about approximate greedification and what choices guarantee policy improvement. In this work, we investigate approximate greedification when reducing the KL divergence between the parameterized policy and the Boltzmann distribution over action values. In particular, we investigate the difference between the forward and reverse KL divergences, with varying degrees of entropy regularization; these are chosen because they underlie many existing policy optimization approaches, as we highlight in this work. We show that the reverse KL has stronger policy improvement guarantees, and that reducing the forward KL can result in a worse policy. We also demonstrate, however, that a large enough reduction of the forward KL can induce improvement under additional assumptions. Empirically, we show on simple continuous-action environments that the forward KL can induce more exploration, but at the cost of a more suboptimal policy. No significant differences were observed in the discrete-action setting or on a suite of benchmark problems. This work provides novel theoretical and empirical insights about the forward KL and reverse KL for greedification, and clear next steps for understanding and improving our policy optimization algorithms. [abs] [ pdf ][ bib ] &copy JMLR 2022. ( edit, beta )

PDF Details

AAAI Conference 2020 Conference Paper

Fixed-Horizon Temporal Difference Methods for Stable Reinforcement Learning

Kristopher De Asis
Alan Chan
Silviu Pitis
Richard Sutton
Daniel Graves

We explore fixed-horizon temporal difference (TD) methods, reinforcement learning algorithms for a new kind of value function that predicts the sum of rewards over a fixed number of future time steps. To learn the value function for horizon h, these algorithms bootstrap from the value function for horizon h−1, or some shorter horizon. Because no value function bootstraps from itself, fixed-horizon methods are immune to the stability problems that plague other off-policy TD methods using function approximation (also known as “the deadly triad”). Although fixed-horizon methods require the storage of additional value functions, this gives the agent additional predictive power, while the added complexity can be substantially reduced via parallel updates, shared weights, and n-step bootstrapping. We show how to use fixed-horizon value functions to solve reinforcement learning problems competitively with methods such as Q-learning that learn conventional value functions. We also prove convergence of fixed-horizon temporal difference methods with linear and general function approximation. Taken together, our results establish fixed-horizon TD methods as a viable new way of avoiding the stability problems of the deadly triad.

PDF Details