MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011233848 · doi:10.1145/1143844.1143901

Automatic basis function construction for approximate dynamic programming and reinforcement learning

2006· article· en· W2011233848 on OpenAlexaff
Philipp W. Keller, Shie Mannor, Doina Precup

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBellman equationMarkov decision processReinforcement learningComputer scienceBasis (linear algebra)Function approximationDynamic programmingCurse of dimensionalityBasis functionMathematical optimizationState spaceTemporal difference learningMarkov processDimensionality reductionQ-learningFunction (biology)Space (punctuation)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the problem of automatically constructing basis functions for linear approximation of the value function of a Markov Decision Process (MDP). Our work builds on results by Bertsekas and Castañon (1989) who proposed a method for automatically aggregating states to speed up value iteration. We propose to use neighborhood component analysis (Goldberger et al., 2005), a dimensionality reduction technique created for supervised learning, in order to map a high-dimensional state space to a low-dimensional space, based on the Bellman error, or on the temporal difference (TD) error. We then place basis function in the lower-dimensional space. These are added as new features for the linear function approximator. This approach is applied to a high-dimensional inventory control problem.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations162
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207