Monte Carlo tree search in continuous action spaces with execution uncertainty
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Real world applications of artificial intelligence often require agents to sequentially choose actions from continuous action spaces with execution uncertainty. When good actions are sparse, domain knowledge is often used to identify a discrete set of promising actions. These actions and their uncertain effects are typically evaluated using a recursive search procedure. The reduction of the problem to a discrete search problem causes severe limitations, notably, not exploiting all of the sampled outcomes when evaluating actions, and not using outcomes to help find new actions outside the original set. We propose a new Monte Carlo tree search (MCTS) algorithm specifically designed for exploiting an execution model in this setting. Using kernel regression, it generalizes the information about action quality between actions and to unexplored parts of the action space. In a high fidelity simulator of the Olympic sport of curling, we show that this approach significantly outperforms existing MCTS methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it