Opposition-Based Q(λ) with Non-Markovian Update
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The OQ(λ) algorithm benefits from an extension of eligibility traces introduced as opposition trace. This new technique is a combination of the idea of opposition and eligibility traces to deal with large state space problems in reinforcement learning applications. In our previous works the comparison of the results of OQ(λ) and conventional Watkins' Q(λ) reflected a remarkable increase in performance for the OQ(λ) algorithm. However the Markovian update of opposition traces is an issue which is investigated in this paper. It has been assumed that the opposite state can be presented to the agent. This may limit the usability of the technique to deterministic environments. In order to relax this assumption the non-Markovian opposition-based Q(λ) (NOQ(λ)) is introduced in this work. The new method is a hybrid of Markovian update for eligibility traces and non-Markovian-based update for opposition traces. The experimental results show improvements of learning speed for the proposed technique compared to Q(λ) and OQ(λ). The new technique performs faster than OQ(λ) algorithm with the same success rate and can be employed for broader range of applications since it does not require determining state transition
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it