1: \begin{abstract}

2: 		Although learning-based methods have great potential for robotics, one concern is that a robot that updates its parameters might cause large amounts of damage before it learns the optimal policy.  We formalize the idea of safe learning in a probabilistic sense by defining an optimization problem: we desire to maximize the expected return while keeping the expected damage below a given safety limit. We study this optimization for the case of a robot manipulator with safety-based torque limits. We would like to ensure that the damage constraint is maintained at every step of the optimization and not just at convergence.  To achieve this aim, we introduce a novel method which predicts how modifying the torque limit, as well as how updating the policy parameters, might affect the robot's safety.  We show through a number of experiments that our approach allows the robot to improve its performance while ensuring that the expected damage constraint is not violated during the learning process.

3: 		%%PA: the abstract doesn't have transfer anywhere in it?  bring it in somewhere how training is often preferably bootstrapped from training in simulation, and we 'd like to safely deploy a policy that's been trained in simulation onto a real robot?  [or is the intent for it to generically be about safe policy improvement rather than transfer?]

4: 		%%^DH: The main focus of the paper is more about safety than transfer, so I thought it would be better not to mention transfer in the abstract, as it would take away from the main message.  The transfer is really just a way of bootstrapping the process, but in theory the initial policy could be initialized randomly and the method would still apply.  My contribution is also on the safety side and not transfer specifically. 

5: 	\end{abstract}

6: