Policy Iteration Based on Stochastic Factorization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a transition probability matrix is represented as the product of two stochastic matrices, one can swap the factors of the multiplication to obtain another transition matrix that retains some fundamental characteristics of the original. Since the derived matrix can be much smaller than its precursor, this property can be exploited to create a compact version of a Markov decision process (MDP), and hence to reduce the computational cost of dynamic programming. Building on this idea, this paper presents an approximate policy iteration algorithm called policy iteration based on stochastic factorization, or PISF for short. In terms of computational complexity, PISF replaces standard policy iteration's cubic dependence on the size of the MDP with a function that grows only linearly with the number of states in the model. The proposed algorithm also enjoys nice theoretical properties: it always terminates after a finite number of iterations and returns a decision policy whose performance only depends on the quality of the stochastic factorization. In particular, if the approximation error in the factorization is sufficiently small, PISF computes the optimal value function of the MDP. The paper also discusses practical ways of factoring an MDP and illustrates the usefulness of the proposed algorithm with an application involving a large-scale decision problem of real economical interest.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".