Language-Vision Reward Shaping for Robotic Policy Learning

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing robotic learning control methods face challenges in creating reward functions that provide meaningful feedback without requiring historical training data or extensive handcrafting, especially in dynamic manufacturing environments where tasks frequently change, and there is a lack of optimal methods for phrasing language instructions to guide policy learning.

Innovation Solution

A method involving image slicing, embedding, and distribution generation based on relevance to task descriptions, using inverse reinforcement learning to create a reward signal that updates robotic policies without historical data, optimizing task descriptions through semantic embedding and entropy-based reward calculation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of information

If dense rewards are used to provide more information about intermediate steps, then the feedback signal quality is improved, but the difficulty of constructing the reward function increases and requires more handcrafting

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefeedback signal informationVSAvoidreward function construction complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses the language instruction itself to automatically generate the reward shaping function through embedding models, eliminating the need for external handcrafting. The language instruction serves dual purposes: guiding the task and defining the reward structure automatically.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The manual process of crafting reward functions is replaced by an automated embedding model that processes language instructions and directly generates potential functions, substituting human engineering effort with computational processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If historical training data is collected to learn potential functions for reward shaping, then the reward function quality is improved, but the time and resources required to build the shaping function increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereward function qualityVSAvoidtime to build shaping function
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The embedding model is pre-trained on general language-data pairs, so when a new language instruction is provided, the system can immediately generate an appropriate reward shaping function without requiring task-specific historical data collection or training time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

A single embedding model serves multiple functions: it processes various language instructions across different tasks and consistently generates appropriate reward shaping functions, making the system universally applicable without task-specific customization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Productivity

If language instructions are optimized through prompt engineering to guide policy learning, then the learning effectiveness is improved, but the complexity of phrasing and optimizing instructions increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepolicy learning effectivenessVSAvoidinstruction phrasing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system uses the language instruction as feedback to the embedding model, which then generates a reward shaping function that reinforces the intended meaning. This creates a closed loop where the instruction quality directly influences the learned policy through the automatically generated reward signal.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Ease of manufacture

If sparse rewards are used to simplify reward function construction, then the ease of implementation is improved, but the information content of the feedback signal decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereward function implementation easeVSAvoidfeedback signal information
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The embedding model acts as an intermediary that translates simple language instructions into rich reward shaping functions. This mediator bridges the gap between simple implementation (sparse reward structure) and rich information content (dense reward signals) by automatically generating appropriate intermediate reward signals.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS12596955B2Reward feedback for learning control policies using natural language and vision data
Publication Date: 2026.04.07 HITACHI LTD
  • US12596955B2 patent drawing
  • US12596955B2 patent drawing
  • US12596955B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Example implementations described herein involve systems and methods for providing a reward to a machine learning algorithm, which can include receiving an image, and a task description defined in text; slicing the image into a plurality of sub-images; executing an embedding model to embed the text of the task description and the sub-images to generate a distribution for the sub-images based on relevance to the task description; and generating the reward from the distribution for the sub-images.