MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

1110 Reinforcement Learning in Consideration of Symmetry

2004· article· en· W2585136924 on OpenAlex
Hiroshi KANKI, Njuki Mureithi, Kengo UDA

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

VenueThe Proceedings of Conference of Kansai Branch · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningHomogeneous spaceSymmetry (geometry)Formalism (music)Markov decision processReinforcementComputer scienceTheoretical physicsMarkov processMathematicsPure mathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsGeometryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a new approach to reinforcement learning in consideration of symmetries. At first we formalize the concept of symmetry in Markov decision processes (MDPs) and derive theoretical results using this formalism. The second we made a check on these theorem by the simulation. Reinforcement Learning is one of the fields studied briskly recently. But in order to use it in the real world, there are some problems. One of them is associated with very long calculation time and amount of calculation. Then, in order to solve them symmetry is used in this research. At first, the agent check condition of the map. And if the map is symmetry, we use our theorem that is reignforcement of consideration symmetries. When this result is seen, it turns out that it is being early completed by the way of the result in consideration of symmetry.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.254 · 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