MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182877511 · doi:10.82308/46241

Optimal time scales for reinforcement learning behaviour strategies

2010· article· en· W2182877511 on OpenAlexaff
Gheorghe Comanici

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTemporal difference learningFormalism (music)Gradient descentRepresentation (politics)Q-learningScale (ratio)Machine learningMathematical optimizationArtificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforcement Learning is a branch of Artificial Intelligence addressing the problem of single-agent autonomous sequential decision making. It proposes computational models which do not rely on the complete knowledge of the dynamics of stochastic environments. Options are a formalism used to temporally extend actions towards hierarchically organized behaviour, a concept used to improve learning in large-scale problems. In this thesis we propose a new approach for generating options. Given controllers or behaviour policies as prior knowledge, we learn how to switch between these policies by optimizing the expected total discounted reward of the hierarchical behaviour. We derive gradient descent-based algorithms for learning optimal termination conditions of options, based on a new option termination representation. We provide theoretical guarantees and extentions of widely used Reinforcement Learning algorithms when options have variable time-scales. Finally, we incorporate the proposed approach into policy-gradient methods with linear function approximation.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
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 score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207