MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128862550 · doi:10.65109/mphg3605

Multi-Agent Patrolling with Reinforcement Learning

2004· preprint· en· W2128862550 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

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatrollingReinforcement learningComputer scienceTask (project management)Adaptation (eye)Domain (mathematical analysis)Variety (cybernetics)Artificial intelligenceDistributed computingMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patrolling tasks can be encountered in a variety of real-world domains, ranging from computer network administration and surveillance to computer wargame simulations. It is a complex multi-agent task, which usually requires agents to coordinate their decision-making in order to achieve optimal performance of the group as a whole. In this paper, we show how the patrolling task can be modeled as a reinforcement learning (RL) problem, allowing continuous and automatic adaptation of the agents? strategies to their environment. We demonstrate that an efficient cooperative behavior can be achieved by using RL methods, such as Q-Learning, to train individual agents. The proposed approach is totally distributed, which makes it computationally efficient. The empirical evaluation proves the effectiveness of our approach, as the results obtained are substantially better than the results available so far on this domain.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Quick stats

Citations107
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207