MinAtar: An Atari-Inspired Testbed for Thorough and Reproducible Reinforcement Learning Experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Arcade Learning Environment (ALE) is a popular platform for evaluating reinforcement learning agents. Much of the appeal comes from the fact that Atari games demonstrate aspects of competency we expect from an intelligent agent and are not biased toward any particular solution approach. The challenge of the ALE includes (1) the representation learning problem of extracting pertinent information from raw pixels, and (2) the behavioural learning problem of leveraging complex, delayed associations between actions and rewards. Often, the research questions we are interested in pertain more to the latter, but the representation learning problem adds significant computational expense. We introduce MinAtar, short for miniature Atari, a new set of environments that capture the general mechanics of specific Atari games while simplifying the representational complexity to focus more on the behavioural challenges. MinAtar consists of analogues of five Atari games: Seaquest, Breakout, Asterix, Freeway and Space Invaders. Each MinAtar environment provides the agent with a 10x10xn binary state representation. Each game plays out on a 10x10 grid with n channels corresponding to game-specific objects, such as ball, paddle and brick in the game Breakout. To investigate the behavioural challenges posed by MinAtar, we evaluated a smaller version of the DQN architecture as well as online actor-critic with eligibility traces. With the representation learning problem simplified, we can perform experiments with significantly less computational expense. In our experiments, we use the saved compute time to perform step-size parameter sweeps and more runs than is typical for the ALE. Experiments like this improve reproducibility, and allow us to draw more confident conclusions. We hope that MinAtar can allow researchers to thoroughly investigate behavioural challenges similar to those inherent in the ALE.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 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".