Autonomous Agents in Snake Game via Deep Reinforcement Learning
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
Since DeepMind pioneered a deep reinforcement learning (DRL) model to play the Atari games, DRL has become a commonly adopted method to enable the agents to learn complex control policies in various video games. However, similar approaches may still need to be improved when applied to more challenging scenarios, where reward signals are sparse and delayed. In this paper, we develop a refined DRL model to enable our autonomous agent to play the classical Snake Game, whose constraint gets stricter as the game progresses. Specifically, we employ a convolutional neural network (CNN) trained with a variant of Q-learning. Moreover, we propose a carefully designed reward mechanism to properly train the network, adopt a training gap strategy to temporarily bypass training after the location of the target changes, and introduce a dual experience replay method to categorize different experiences for better training efficacy. The experimental results show that our agent outperforms the baseline model and surpasses human-level performance in terms of playing the Snake Game.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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