MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072164538 · doi:10.1142/s0218213006002990

AGGREGATION OF MULTIPLE REINFORCEMENT LEARNING ALGORITHMS

2006· article· en· W2072164538 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningLearning classifier systemRobustness (evolution)Artificial intelligenceInstance-based learningMachine learningAlgorithmUnsupervised learningRobot learningFault toleranceArchitectureDistributed computingRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforcement learning (RL) has been successfully used in many fields. With the increasing complexity of environments and tasks, it is difficult for a single learning algorithm to cope with complicated problems with high performance. This paper proposes a new multiple learning architecture, "Aggregated Multiple Reinforcement Learning System (AMRLS)", which aggregates different RL algorithms in each learning step to make more appropriate sequential decisions than those made by individual learning algorithms. This architecture was tested on a Cart-Pole system. The presented simulation results confirm our prediction and reveal that aggregation not only provides robustness and fault tolerance ability, but also produces more smooth learning curves and needs fewer learning steps than individual learning algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.262 · 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