MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2431563754

On the influence of learning time on evolutionary online learning of cooperative behavior

2001· article· en· W2431563754 on OpenAlexaff
Jörg Denzinger, Michael Kordt

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffline learningComputer scienceReinforcement learningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningKey (lock)Online learningAction (physics)Evolutionary computationDuration (music)Evolutionary algorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an online learning approach for learning cooperative behavior in multi-agent systems based on invoking an offline learning method as a special action learn. We apply this approach to evolutionary offline learning using situation-action-pairs and the nearest-neighbor rule as agent architecture. For the application Pursuit Games we show that the online approach using evolutionary offline learning allows for good success rates for rather different game variants. Particularly, we perform experiments highlighting the influence of the time needed for learning and of the parameters of the evolutionary offline method. Our results show that even a duration of learn which is several times longer than the usual duration of an agent's actions still achieves good success rates. The same applies to rather small values for the key parameters of the offline method. Together, this suggests that this evolutionary online learning approach is a very good alternative to the well-known online approaches based on reinforcement learning.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetic and Evolutionary Computation ConferenceSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207