Deep Reactive Policies for Planning in Stochastic Nonlinear Domains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in applying deep learning to planning have shown that Deep Reactive Policies (DRPs) can be powerful for fast decision-making in complex environments. However, an important limitation of current DRP-based approaches is either the need of optimal planners to be used as ground truth in a supervised learning setting or the sample complexity of high-variance policy gradient estimators, which are particularly troublesome in continuous state-action domains. In order to overcome those limitations, we introduce a framework for training DRPs in continuous stochastic spaces via gradient-based policy search. The general approach is to explicitly encode a parametric policy as a deep neural network, and to formulate the probabilistic planning problem as an optimization task in a stochastic computation graph by exploiting the re-parameterization of the transition probability densities; the optimization is then solved by leveraging gradient descent algorithms that are able to handle non-convex objective functions. We benchmark our approach against stochastic planning domains exhibiting arbitrary differentiable nonlinear transition and cost functions (e.g., Reservoir Control, HVAC and Navigation). Results show that DRPs with more than 125,000 continuous action parameters can be optimized by our approach for problems with 30 state fluents and 30 action fluents on inexpensive hardware under 6 minutes. Also, we observed a speedup of 5 orders of magnitude in the average inference time per decision step of DRPs when compared to other state-of-the-art online gradient-based planners when the same level of solution quality is required.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".