MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809097245 · doi:10.1162/evco_a_00232

Emergent Solutions to High-Dimensional Multitask Reinforcement Learning

2018· article· en· W2809097245 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen Kelly, Malcolm I. Heywood

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolutionary Computation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTask (project management)NeuroevolutionRepresentation (politics)Face (sociological concept)Machine learningA priori and a posterioriArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Algorithms that learn through environmental interaction and delayed rewards, or reinforcement learning (RL), increasingly face the challenge of scaling to dynamic, high-dimensional, and partially observable environments. Significant attention is being paid to frameworks from deep learning, which scale to high-dimensional data by decomposing the task through multilayered neural networks. While effective, the representation is complex and computationally demanding. In this work, we propose a framework based on genetic programming which adaptively complexifies policies through interaction with the task. We make a direct comparison with several deep reinforcement learning frameworks in the challenging Atari video game environment as well as more traditional reinforcement learning frameworks based on a priori engineered features. Results indicate that the proposed approach matches the quality of deep learning while being a minimum of three orders of magnitude simpler with respect to model complexity. This results in real-time operation of the champion RL agent without recourse to specialized hardware support. Moreover, the approach is capable of evolving solutions to multiple game titles simultaneously with no additional computational cost. In this case, agent behaviours for an individual game as well as single agents capable of playing all games emerge from the same evolutionary run.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations39
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionary ComputationSame topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207