MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945943081 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2019/581

Metatrace Actor-Critic: Online Step-Size Tuning by Meta-gradient Descent for Reinforcement Learning Control

2019· preprint· en· W2945943081 on OpenAlexaff
Kenny Young, Baoxiang Wang, Matthew E. Taylor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperparameterReinforcement learningComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Gradient descentArtificial intelligenceNonlinear systemFunction approximationMachine learningMathematical optimizationArtificial neural networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforcement learning (RL) has had many successes, but significant hyperparameter tuning is commonly required to achieve good performance. Furthermore, when nonlinear function approximation is used, non-stationarity in the state representation can lead to learning instability. A variety of techniques exist to combat this --- most notably experience replay or the use of parallel actors. These techniques stabilize learning by making the RL problem more similar to the supervised setting. However, they come at the cost of moving away from the RL problem as it is typically formulated, that is, a single agent learning online without maintaining a large database of training examples. To address these issues, we propose Metatrace, a meta-gradient descent based algorithm to tune the step-size online. Metatrace leverages the structure of eligibility traces, and works for both tuning a scalar step-size and a respective step-size for each parameter. We empirically evaluate Metatrace for actor-critic on the Arcade Learning Environment. Results show Metatrace can speed up learning, and improve performance in non-stationary settings.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207