AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF POTENTIAL-BASED REWARD SHAPING AND ADVICE IN COMPLEX, MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS
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
This paper investigates the impact of reward shaping in multi-agent reinforcement learning as a way to incorporate domain knowledge about good strategies. In theory, potential-based reward shaping does not alter the Nash Equilibria of a stochastic game, only the exploration of the shaped agent. We demonstrate empirically the performance of reward shaping in two problem domains within the context of RoboCup KeepAway by designing three reward shaping schemes, encouraging specific behaviour such as keeping a minimum distance from other players on the same team and taking on specific roles. The results illustrate that reward shaping with multiple, simultaneous learning agents can reduce the time needed to learn a suitable policy and can alter the final group performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it