MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460675832 · doi:10.7939/r34p5w

Regularization in reinforcement learning

2011· article· en· W2460675832 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningMarkov decision processMinimaxRegularization (linguistics)Mathematical optimizationBellman equationEstimatorComputer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmMarkov processArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis studies the reinforcement learning and planning problems that are modeled by a discounted Markov Decision Process (MDP) with a large state space and finite action space. We follow the value-based approach in which a function approximator is used to estimate the optimal value function. The choice of function approximator, however, is nontrivial, as it depends on both the number of data samples and the MDP itself. The goal of this work is to introduce flexible and statistically-efficient algorithms that find close to optimal policies for these problems without much prior information about them. The recurring theme of this thesis is the application of the regularization technique to design value function estimators that choose their estimates from rich function spaces. We introduce regularization-based Approximate Value/Policy Iteration algorithms, analyze their statistical properties, and provide upper bounds on the performance loss of the resulted policy compared to the optimal one. The error bounds show the dependence of the performance loss on the number of samples, the capacity of the function space to which the estimated value function belongs, and some intrinsic properties of the MDP itself. Remarkably, the dependence on the number of samples in the task of policy evaluation is minimax optimal. We also address the problem of automatic parameter-tuning of reinforcement learning/planning algorithms and introduce a complexity regularization-based model selection algorithm. We prove that the algorithm enjoys an oracle-like property and it may be used to achieve adaptivity: the performance is almost as good as the performance of the unknown best parameters. Our two other contributions are used to analyze the aforementioned algorithms. First, we analyze the rate of convergence of the estimation error in regularized least-squares regression when the data is exponentially beta-mixing. We prove that up to a logarithmic factor, the convergence rate is the same as the optimal minimax rate available for the i.i.d. case. Second, we attend to the question of how the errors at each iteration of the approximate policy/value iteration influence the quality of the resulting policy. We provide results that highlight some new aspects of these algorithms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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