EFFICIENT ABSTRACTION SELECTION IN REINFORCEMENT LEARNING
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 article addresses reinforcement learning problems based on factored Markov decision processes (MDPs) in which the agent must choose among a set of candidate abstractions , each build up from a different combination of state components. We present and evaluate a new approach that can perform effective abstraction selection that is more resource‐efficient and/or more general than existing approaches. The core of the approach is to make selection of an abstraction part of the learning agent's decision‐making process by augmenting the agent's action space with internal actions that select the abstraction it uses. We prove that under certain conditions this approach results in a derived MDP whose solution yields both the optimal abstraction for the original MDP and the optimal policy under that abstraction. We examine our approach in three domains of increasing complexity: contextual bandit problems, episodic MDPs, and general MDPs with context‐specific structure. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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