MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620853660 · doi:10.5555/3091125.3091207

Forward Actor-Critic for Nonlinear Function Approximation in Reinforcement Learning

2017· article· en· W2620853660 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

VenueAdaptive Agents and Multi-Agents Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceBellman equationFunction approximationNonlinear systemFunction (biology)Class (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceTemporal difference learningMathematical optimizationMachine learningArtificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-step methods are important in reinforcement learn- ing (RL). Eligibility traces, the usual way of handling them, works well with linear function approximators. Recently, van Seijen (2016) had introduced a delayed learning approach, without eligibility traces, for handling the multi-step λ-return with nonlinear function approximators. However, this was limited to action-value methods. In this paper, we extend this approach to handle n-step returns, generalize this approach to policy gradient methods and empirically study the effect of such delayed updates in control tasks. Specifically, we introduce two novel forward actor- critic methods and empirically investigate our proposed methods with the conventional actor-critic method on mountain car and pole-balancing tasks. From our experiments, we observe that forward actor-critic dramatically outperforms the conventional actor-critic in these standard control tasks. Notably, this forward actor-critic method has produced a new class of multi-step RL algorithms without eligibility traces.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.237 · 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