MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995031981 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.05109

Doubly Robust Off-Policy Actor-Critic Algorithms for Reinforcement Learning

2019· preprint· en· W2995031981 on OpenAlexaff
Riashat Islam, Raihan Seraj, Samin Yeasar Arnob, Doina Precup

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningEstimatorComputer scienceVariance (accounting)Function (biology)Bellman equationValue (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsEconomicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of off-policy critic evaluation in several variants of value-based off-policy actor-critic algorithms. Off-policy actor-critic algorithms require an off-policy critic evaluation step, to estimate the value of the new policy after every policy gradient update. Despite enormous success of off-policy policy gradients on control tasks, existing general methods suffer from high variance and instability, partly because the policy improvement depends on gradient of the estimated value function. In this work, we present a new way of off-policy policy evaluation in actor-critic, based on the doubly robust estimators. We extend the doubly robust estimator from off-policy policy evaluation (OPE) to actor-critic algorithms that consist of a reward estimator performance model. We find that doubly robust estimation of the critic can significantly improve performance in continuous control tasks. Furthermore, in cases where the reward function is stochastic that can lead to high variance, doubly robust critic estimation can improve performance under corrupted, stochastic reward signals, indicating its usefulness for robust and safe reinforcement learning.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.125 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207