Improving Sample Efficiency in Model-Free Reinforcement Learning from Images
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training an agent to solve control tasks directly from high-dimensional images with model-free reinforcement learning (RL) has proven difficult. A promising approach is to learn a latent representation together with the control policy. However, fitting a high-capacity encoder using a scarce reward signal is sample inefficient and leads to poor performance. Prior work has shown that auxiliary losses, such as image reconstruction, can aid efficient representation learning. However, incorporating reconstruction loss into an off-policy learning algorithm often leads to training instability. We explore the underlying reasons and identify variational autoencoders, used by previous investigations, as the cause of the divergence. Following these findings, we propose effective techniques to improve training stability. This results in a simple approach capable of matching state-of-the-art model-free and model-based algorithms on MuJoCo control tasks. Furthermore, our approach demonstrates robustness to observational noise, surpassing existing approaches in this setting. Code, results, and videos are anonymously available at https://sites.google.com/view/sac-ae/home.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it