Hierarchical Approximate Policy Iteration With Binary-Tree State Space Decomposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".