Multi-timescale Nexting in a Reinforcement Learning Robot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term "nexting" has been used by psychologists to refer to the propensity of people and many other animals to continually predict what will happen next in an immediate, local, and personal sense. The ability to "next" constitutes a basic kind of awareness and knowledge of one's environment. In this paper we present results with a robot that learns to next in real time, predicting thousands of features of the world's state, including all sensory inputs, at timescales from 0.1 to 8 seconds. This was achieved by treating each state feature as a reward-like target and applying temporal-difference methods to learn a corresponding value function with a discount rate corresponding to the timescale. We show that two thousand predictions, each dependent on six thousand state features, can be learned and updated online at better than 10Hz on a laptop computer, using the standard TD(lambda) algorithm with linear function approximation. We show that this approach is efficient enough to be practical, with most of the learning complete within 30 minutes. We also show that a single tile-coded feature representation suffices to accurately predict many different signals at a significant range of timescales. Finally, we show that the accuracy of our learned predictions compares favorably with the optimal off-line solution.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".