MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086608109 · doi:10.1109/tnn.2011.2168422

Hierarchical Approximate Policy Iteration With Binary-Tree State Space Decomposition

2011· article· en· W2086608109 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMarkov decision processReinforcement learningKernel (algebra)State spaceMathematical optimizationTree (set theory)AlgorithmMarkov processArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, approximate policy iteration (API) has attracted increasing attention in reinforcement learning (RL), e.g., least-squares policy iteration (LSPI) and its kernelized version, the kernel-based LSPI algorithm. However, it remains difficult for API algorithms to obtain near-optimal policies for Markov decision processes (MDPs) with large or continuous state spaces. To address this problem, this paper presents a hierarchical API (HAPI) method with binary-tree state space decomposition for RL in a class of absorbing MDPs, which can be formulated as time-optimal learning control tasks. In the proposed method, after collecting samples adaptively in the state space of the original MDP, a learning-based decomposition strategy of sample sets was designed to implement the binary-tree state space decomposition process. Then, API algorithms were used on the sample subsets to approximate local optimal policies of sub-MDPs. The original MDP was decomposed into a binary-tree structure of absorbing sub-MDPs, constructed during the learning process, thus, local near-optimal policies were approximated by API algorithms with reduced complexity and higher precision. Furthermore, because of the improved quality of local policies, the combined global policy performed better than the near-optimal policy obtained by a single API algorithm in the original MDP. Three learning control problems, including path-tracking control of a real mobile robot, were studied to evaluate the performance of the HAPI method. With the same setting for basis function selection and sample collection, the proposed HAPI obtained better near-optimal policies than previous API methods such as LSPI and KLSPI.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.227 · 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