MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167748058

Average Reward Optimization Objective In Partially Observable Domains

2013· article· en· W2167748058 on OpenAlexaff
Yuri Grinberg, Doina Precup

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservabilityDimension (graph theory)ObservableRepresentation (politics)Function (biology)MathematicsProcess (computing)Mathematical optimizationBellman equationComputer scienceComputationKey (lock)Applied mathematicsAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of average reward optimization in domains with partial observability, within the modeling framework of linear predictive state representations (PSRs) (Littman et al., 2001). The key to average-reward computation is to have a welldefined stationary behavior of a system, so the required averages can be computed. If, additionally, the stationary behavior varies smoothly with changes in policy parameters, average-reward control through policy search also becomes a possibility. In this paper, we show that PSRs have a well-behaved stationary distribution, which is a rational function of policy parameters. Based on this result, we define a related reward process particularly suitable for average reward optimization, and analyze its properties. We show that in such a predictive state reward process, the average reward is a rational function of the policy parameters, whose complexity depends on the dimension of the underlying linear PSR. This result suggests that average reward-based policy search methods can be effective when the dimension of the system is small, even when the system representation in the POMDP framework requires many hidden states. We provide illustrative examples of this type. 1.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207