MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038915804 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.02151

Variational Policy Gradient Method for Reinforcement Learning with General Utilities

2020· preprint· en· W3038915804 on OpenAlex

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

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningReinforcementComputer scienceGradient methodMathematical optimizationMathematical economicsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, reinforcement learning (RL) systems with general goals beyond a cumulative sum of rewards have gained traction, such as in constrained problems, exploration, and acting upon prior experiences. In this paper, we consider policy optimization in Markov Decision Problems, where the objective is a general concave utility function of the state-action occupancy measure, which subsumes several of the aforementioned examples as special cases. Such generality invalidates the Bellman equation. As this means that dynamic programming no longer works, we focus on direct policy search. Analogously to the Policy Gradient Theorem \cite{sutton2000policy} available for RL with cumulative rewards, we derive a new Variational Policy Gradient Theorem for RL with general utilities, which establishes that the parametrized policy gradient may be obtained as the solution of a stochastic saddle point problem involving the Fenchel dual of the utility function. We develop a variational Monte Carlo gradient estimation algorithm to compute the policy gradient based on sample paths. We prove that the variational policy gradient scheme converges globally to the optimal policy for the general objective, though the optimization problem is nonconvex. We also establish its rate of convergence of the order $O(1/t)$ by exploiting the hidden convexity of the problem, and proves that it converges exponentially when the problem admits hidden strong convexity. Our analysis applies to the standard RL problem with cumulative rewards as a special case, in which case our result improves the available convergence rate.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.145 · 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