MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964599462 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019955

Learning Options with Interest Functions

2019· article· en· W2964599462 on OpenAlex
Khimya Khetarpal, Doina Precup

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)Function (biology)State spacePlan (archaeology)Space (punctuation)ArchitectureState (computer science)Artificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning temporal abstractions which are partial solutions to a task and could be reused for solving other tasks is an ingredient that can help agents to plan and learn efficiently. In this work, we tackle this problem in the options framework. We aim to autonomously learn options which are specialized in different state space regions by proposing a notion of interest functions, which generalizes initiation sets from the options framework for function approximation. We build on the option-critic framework to derive policy gradient theorems for interest functions, leading to a new interest-option-critic architecture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.206 · 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