Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the first actor-critic al-gorithm for off-policy reinforcement learning. Our algorithm is online and incremental, and its per-time-step complexity scales linearly with the number of learned weights. Pre-vious work on actor-critic algorithms is lim-ited to the on-policy setting and does not take advantage of the recent advances in off-policy gradient temporal-difference learning. Off-policy techniques, such as Greedy-GQ, enable a target policy to be learned while following and obtaining data from another (behavior) policy. For many problems, how-ever, actor-critic methods are more practical than action value methods (like Greedy-GQ) because they explicitly represent the policy; consequently, the policy can be stochastic and utilize a large action space. In this pa-per, we illustrate how to practically combine the generality and learning potential of off-policy learning with the flexibility in action selection given by actor-critic methods. We derive an incremental, linear time and space complexity algorithm that includes eligibility traces, prove convergence under assumptions similar to previous off-policy algorithms, and empirically show better or comparable per-formance to existing algorithms on standard reinforcement-learning benchmark problems. The reinforcement learning framework is a general temporal learning formalism that has, over the last few decades, seen a marked growth in algorithms and applications. Until recently, however, practical online
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".