MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2219400200 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v29i1.9655

Approximate Linear Programming for Constrained Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes

2015· article· en· W2219400200 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Science, ICT and Future Planning
KeywordsObservablePartially observable Markov decision processMarkov decision processMathematical optimizationBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceLinear programmingSuiteSequence (biology)Dynamic programmingController (irrigation)State (computer science)Markov processMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many situations, it is desirable to optimize a sequence of decisions by maximizing a primary objective while respecting some constraints with respect to secondary objectives. Such problems can be naturally modeled as constrained partially observable Markov decision processes (CPOMDPs) when the environment is partially observable. In this work, we describe a technique based on approximate linear programming to optimize policies in CPOMDPs. The optimization is performed offline and produces a finite state controller with desirable performance guarantees. The approach outperforms a constrained version of point-based value iteration on a suite of benchmark problems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.184 · 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