MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120045945 · doi:10.1287/moor.2016.0832

On the Asymptotic Optimality of Finite Approximations to Markov Decision Processes with Borel Spaces

2017· preprint· en· W2120045945 on OpenAlexafffund
Naci Saldı, Serdar Yüksel, Tamás Linder

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Operations Research · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMarkov decision processMathematicsState spaceConvergence (economics)Applied mathematicsMathematical optimizationAction (physics)Markov chainSpace (punctuation)Finite stateMarkov processClass (philosophy)Q-learningState (computer science)Average costReinforcement learningComputer scienceAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calculating optimal policies is known to be computationally difficult for Markov decision processes (MDPs) with Borel state and action spaces. This paper studies finite-state approximations of discrete time Markov decision processes with Borel state and action spaces, for both discounted and average costs criteria. The stationary policies thus obtained are shown to approximate the optimal stationary policy with arbitrary precision under quite general conditions for discounted cost and more restrictive conditions for average cost. For compact-state MDPs, we obtain explicit rate of convergence bounds quantifying how the approximation improves as the size of the approximating finite state space increases. Using information theoretic arguments, the order optimality of the obtained convergence rates is established for a large class of problems. We also show that as a pre-processing step, the action space can also be finitely approximated with sufficiently large number points; thereby, well known algorithms, such as value or policy iteration, Q-learning, etc., can be used to calculate near optimal policies.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics of Operations ResearchSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207